| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 21:33:42
Great writers have Negative Capability which is the ability to take yourself out of a character and write them as they need too. A bad villain is one that is not written as evil as he should be because of an authors personal morals. (Not that they have to be depraved, just that they have to be well consistent I guess)
Negative Capability goes a long way in Role Playing.
In the Live action game I do I would LOVE to play a DARK PALADIN. But I don't, because I do not think I could ever get myself to kill player characters and be appropriately evil (I can as a DM, there is just more personal and social investment as a player character) Plus the consequences of character death are significantly more in the lIve action. I have actually seen friendships broken up because one character killed another. (both in Tabletop and Live action).
This is extreme case I know, but I know far too many people that have difficulty drawing the line.
I generally play good characters, but when I DM I can make the appropriate villains, play any kind of character, and any kind of race. When I play however I only really enjoy playing Humans, (High Human types (Melnibonean, Tarakion, Denedais, Etc.), Elves (all types), Half Elves, and Any human/outsider cross breed. Funny enough I am OK playing the beast man type of character as long as they are of the high wisdom type. Generally unintelligent races, or the stunties I can never really enjoy. I never really get into Half-Orcs, or Dwarves, Halflings, Gnomes. I can never really invest the proper amount of emotion in these races to really enjoy them.
As a DM however, I do a fine job of roleplaying these characters. But in that case, the roleplay is to advance the story, or provide a contact that is realistic. I have no more emotion in vested in them than I do in ensuring the dungeon makes sense (Which is still quite alot but not what you would put into a PC). It is easier for me to play a dwarf, Half orc, or other stunty as a NPC than a PC. The races definitely have their draw, I just could not imagine playing one as a primary character.
For me an NPC villain is not an investment of my personality so much. I can roleplay any NPC I have to, be it table top or live action. For a PC though, there is a range I am willing to play because it is tough for me to get involved in a character if I do not really like them.
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| warlockco |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 17:02:17
Most of my characters tend to be multi-class, back in 1E and 2E, I had alot of Fighter/Mages, Fighter/Mage/Thieves, Cleric/Fighters, Cleric/Mages, and Cleric/Fighter/Mage/Thieves. What can I say, I like to be able to do almost anything. 
With 3E, I tend to multi-class with Cleric/Rangers, with the occasional level of Rogue sometimes. And if the DM allows it, the Ninja class from Rokugan. Most of my builds aim for a BAB of +16 at least for 20th level, this way I have 4 attacks.
I make what I think of as Battle Clerics, Clerics that use their spells to enhance their combat ability (Divine Favor and Divine Power being frequently used spells), as opposed to Clerics that sling their spells at their foes. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 16:47:14
The only tendancy I have ever noticed in my characters that I have made up is that when I am a player, rather than a DM, I have a tendancy to play characters that are definately "good", usually paladins, fighters, rangers, or clerics that are LG or NG. I think I get burned out on being evil and devious as a DM and vent it by being a pillar of virtue as a PC, lol.
Of course, there are always exceptions. In our Star Wars game I started playing a Falleen Scoundrel that definately isn't a paragon of virtue . . . but then again, that is in a galaxy far, far away, and not in Toril or any similar world . . . |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 16:33:33
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Luther Cromwell
Random Question: do you find rogue players to be the most inflexible players ever? I mean for me they have his mentality that the 'inferior' classes are too loud, too big, too unskilled, or too complicated. I find that rogue players, when forced to play something other than that halfing rogue with tons of ranks in Hide and Move Silently and Tumble, (I say forced, because there's no point in asking the rogue player), that the rogue player will play other classes as if they were rogues. I'm sorry, but it doesn't take Elminster to know that a Bard doesn't have sneak attack.
Not at all... I played, back in the days of 2E, a thief with the Swashbuckler kit, and I had a lot of fun with him. But none of my other characters had anything in common with him, save for a tendency to be clever. One of the characters I played after that was a minotaur fighter, and he did nothing rogue-like. In fact, he would rather kick down a door than wait for a thief to pick the lock (he sometimes didn't bother to see if it was unlocked before kicking it down!).
I play a great many rogue characters, but they're almost never straight rogues. They always become assassins, pick up a little fighter (the swashbuckler type), or something even more creative. Personally, I feel that Divine Seeker is one of the best rogue prestige classes -- the abilities just perfectly compliment the rogue's -- or, of course, assassin and/or shadowdancer.
My most powerful PC (the one who's married to one of my adventuring companions) is a 10 rogue / 5 thief-acrobat / 9 assassin. Add to the mix a vorpal sword and a life-stealing dagger and. . . well.
But we were talking about going against typecast.
I've found it's a good thing to break oneself of the "rogues = rogues" and "fighters = fighters" mentality. The rogue has some excellent skills (and skill points) that help out any class. "Rogue-type" feats like weapon finesse, dodge, mobility, and spring attack go a long way, as well.
I once had a 1st level rogue who got whipped badly in a fight and decided to become the greatest swordsman ever known. Now, 18 levels later (2 of them rogue, 6 fighter, and 10 duelist) he kicks serious tail. I still consider him a rogue at this point.
Another of mine purposefully set out to get sneak attack, evasion, and some serious skill points with a couple rogue levels, then switched over to fighter for some hard-hitting skill and feats (two-bladed sword and all that), then barbarian for even harder hitting. But he still fights like a rogue -- darting around the edges of combat -- unless he needs to get in the thick of it, where he can hold his own.
Rogue makes a good multiclass class, in addition to being a good central class.
Just some input from me.
Cheers |
| Edain Shadowstar |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 06:59:39
Good, evil, male, female, warrior, rogue, spellcaster, elf, dwarf, human...whatever the combination I've probably played it for at least a little while over the years. As a PC or a DM I'll play whatever role is best and most fun at the time. Even if that means being a Dwarf. Of course, that has taken a while to evolve; if you look at how I play Edain Shadowstar, my first character, as opposed to someone like the souless, quasi-tyrant Tethera Janarik, or the tormented psychopath Jarren Silverhand (man have been alot of crazy people over the years?) the styles are very different. Edain is very much like me, a kow-it-all, sarcastic, occasionally sardonic, a skeptic, a cynic, and madly in love with a girl whose name beings with an "A". Tethera, on the other hand, has no sense of humor, no morals, no shame and, of course, no soul. Tethera was fun (and a bit challenging) mostly because he was so abosolutely devoid of morality. This guy made Drow look honest and good natured.
I honestly think the fun, and perhaps to point, of roleplaying is to be, oh I don't know, somebody different than yourself. I think it also, at least in my case, can allow you to examine, at least in brief, what it is to act a different way. I'm not evil in real life (at least I think I'm not), but I have been in D&D and its interesting to see how I feel after, oh say, slaughtering a group of innocent peasants. Maybe that just my unfortunate penchant for over-empathizing (I have this tragic tendancy for trying to feel what another person feels in any given situation, be it real or fictious). Anyways, in summation "Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun" (sorry I just had to use that one). |
| warlockco |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 03:59:50
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Not at all... I played, back in the days of 2E, a thief with the Swashbuckler kit, and I had a lot of fun with him. But none of my other characters had anything in common with him, save for a tendency to be clever. One of the characters I played after that was a minotaur fighter, and he did nothing rogue-like. In fact, he would rather kick down a door than wait for a thief to pick the lock (he sometimes didn't bother to see if it was unlocked before kicking it down!).
Locks? Those are the other bits that helps hold the door up right?
That was the attitude of one of my players in a game, where he had a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength in 2E. He would kick down each and every door, until I put a Wall of Force behind one. He was not happy, when I told him that he shattered his leg, and was out a quarter of his hit points. On top of it all the party didn't have a cleric with access to regenerate. I was being a very evil DM with it  |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 03:55:32
I know what you are saying cromwell, but I have only seen this with inexperienced roleplayers. They beleive every class is type casted or something. Roleplayers that do that usually come around and break the habit though.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 03:07:43
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Luther Cromwell
Random Question: do you find rogue players to be the most inflexible players ever? I mean for me they have his mentality that the 'inferior' classes are too loud, too big, too unskilled, or too complicated. I find that rogue players, when forced to play something other than that halfing rogue with tons of ranks in Hide and Move Silently and Tumble, (I say forced, because there's no point in asking the rogue player), that the rogue player will play other classes as if they were rogues. I'm sorry, but it doesn't take Elminster to know that a Bard doesn't have sneak attack.
Not at all... I played, back in the days of 2E, a thief with the Swashbuckler kit, and I had a lot of fun with him. But none of my other characters had anything in common with him, save for a tendency to be clever. One of the characters I played after that was a minotaur fighter, and he did nothing rogue-like. In fact, he would rather kick down a door than wait for a thief to pick the lock (he sometimes didn't bother to see if it was unlocked before kicking it down!). |
| Sir Luther Cromwell |
Posted - 22 Aug 2005 : 02:46:31
quote:
That is not THAT flexible. Dwarves make pretty good swords too!
Yes, but they are generally made to sell to those 'flowery, tree-huggin pansies' that'll buy them. For a dwarf, nothing says 'don't mess with me' better than a hammer or axe. Heck, why not a hammer and a axe?
Random Question: do you find rogue players to be the most inflexible players ever? I mean for me they have his mentality that the 'inferior' classes are too loud, too big, too unskilled, or too complicated. I find that rogue players, when forced to play something other than that halfing rogue with tons of ranks in Hide and Move Silently and Tumble, (I say forced, because there's no point in asking the rogue player), that the rogue player will play other classes as if they were rogues. I'm sorry, but it doesn't take Elminster to know that a Bard doesn't have sneak attack.
Player-"Hey, wait, I thought you said they were like rogues"
DM-"Yes, but they aren't rogues themselves"
Player-"He could be the rare sneak attack bard"
DM-"keep this up, and he'll be the not-so-rare dead bard" |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 20 Aug 2005 : 10:36:08
quote:
Originally posted by Surly Dwarf
I prefer to play a dwarf. I can be flexible though,
he can have a Hammer or an Axe.
That is not THAT flexible. Dwarves make pretty good swords too!
|
| Misericordia |
Posted - 19 Aug 2005 : 21:42:19
quote:
Originally posted by Surly Dwarf
I prefer to play a dwarf. I can be flexible though,
he can have a Hammer or an Axe.
 |
| Surly Dwarf |
Posted - 19 Aug 2005 : 10:37:37
I prefer to play a dwarf. I can be flexible though,
he can have a Hammer or an Axe.
|
| daarkknight |
Posted - 19 Aug 2005 : 02:35:13
A few examples of things I've done as a PC. To some degree, I may have done them as a shock to my DM at the time, who was easily shocked by some things. 
In one game session, I played a female drow bard, playing up more the dancing aspect of it. The group I had joined had a centaur as a companion. I had decided that the character wanted to "see if what they said about centaurs was true." It took my DM about a minute to think of where to go after I asked that.
Another time, I was playing a drow infiltrator (old 2E kit from the Complete Book of Elves). We were playing during the Crown Wars era, and we were in Miyeritar (just FYI so everyone doesn't think I love playing drow. I don't. But I've seen plenty others that do). I had noticed that some gold elf guards/troops were accosting a female companion of mine. After they let her go, I snuck up on one of the gold elves and used my wand of polymorphing on him, turning him into a rabbit, which I proceeded to hunt and kill.
Taking my hunting prize home with me in a sack, I was late for dinner and the matriarch asked me what I was doing. I calmly raised the sack to my family and said, "I was hunting. Anyone want rabbit?" It took at least 2 minutes of my DM shaking his head before he could just simply reply, "I can't believe you went there."
I've never really done anything evil as a character. The things I've done to push things have always been humorous. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 18 Aug 2005 : 16:08:13
Thanks. I shall pass your compliments along to my hus--er, friend. 
Cheers |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 18 Aug 2005 : 06:25:57
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
('coure, it's not like we roleplayed the production side of things  ).
It's a tribute to our respective roleplaying abilities that we were both able to play it well, believably, and it didn't get weird. (LARP might have been a little dicey, but we didn't cross that particular bridge )
Anyway, it's experiences like this that have helped me establish this negative capability thing. I find D&D is an excellent training ground for N.C.
My two coppers.
Cheers
Yes I assure you, I have yet to see a pairing as such in the LARP I am in. However, many many people have gotten involved romantically because of INGAME character relationships.
Still it sounds like you have an incredible group of roleplayers to pull that off without feeling weird.
|
| warlockco |
Posted - 18 Aug 2005 : 05:25:41
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Kajehase
Granny Weathermax...
Granny Weatermax was one of the most challenging roleplaying experiences I've ever had -- and one of the most rewarding. For some roleplayers, it would be enough of a challenge to roleplay a PC who was a member of the opposite sex, but when you also have to play this same character as an elderly one... that takes quite an amount of skill and patience.
quote:
Wait -- are you saying you're the Lady K? And you just had a baby... That's some impressive roleplaying!
No, no... the actual player character of the Lady Kazandra I roleplayed was for a RL campaign during 2001. Kazandra is actually based on an official NPC (of the same name) from the Ravenloft campaign setting. She is, or rather was (until the Sage [being Rastromo Meradoc] "dispatched" her), the vampiric mistress of the evil Kargatane.
I can't wait until the "Australian" (or rather Welsh) Lady K reads this... .
So does that mean we should prepare the "guest room" for you, as a reservation invite from Lady K? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 18 Aug 2005 : 02:09:12
quote:
Originally posted by Kajehase
Granny Weathermax...
Granny Weatermax was one of the most challenging roleplaying experiences I've ever had -- and one of the most rewarding. For some roleplayers, it would be enough of a challenge to roleplay a PC who was a member of the opposite sex, but when you also have to play this same character as an elderly one... that takes quite an amount of skill and patience.
quote:
Wait -- are you saying you're the Lady K? And you just had a baby... That's some impressive roleplaying!
No, no... the actual player character of the Lady Kazandra I roleplayed was for a RL campaign during 2001. Kazandra is actually based on an official NPC (of the same name) from the Ravenloft campaign setting. She is, or rather was (until the Sage [being Rastromo Meradoc] "dispatched" her), the vampiric mistress of the evil Kargatane.
I can't wait until the "Australian" (or rather Welsh) Lady K reads this... .
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 17:10:35
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
The evil character portion of Wooly's post is pretty much the same for me as well, although I've roleplayed two female PCs -- Granny Weathermax and Lady Kazandra .
Wait -- are you saying you're the Lady K? And you just had a baby... That's some impressive roleplaying!
|
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 16:41:27
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
Great writers have Negative Capability which is the ability to take yourself out of a character and write them as they need too. A bad villain is one that is not written as evil as he should be because of an authors personal morals. (Not that they have to be depraved, just that they have to be well consistent I guess)
Negative Capability goes a long way in Role Playing.
Excellent topic, Mourn! You're absolutely right.
It's so tempting and easy to write (and/or roleplay characters based on one's own personal morals), but it doesn't make for great characters, unfortunately, unless that's how the character is supposed to be. Even then, the noble, NG half-elf mage comes off as a mouthpiece, and no one wants that, least of all the author!
When it came to gaming, one of my longterm goals was to play successfully a very devout, righteous, unflinching paladin type, mostly because it's so opposite how I really am (though I did go through the righteous fury phase in my intemperate youth). My preferred style? Inquisitor -- that is, rogue / paladin. Hasn't manifested much, but that would be what I'd want to do.
I find I play a great many rogues, which is odd since were I put in the Realms, I'd definitely be a wizard (and not even a sorcerer: definitely a wizard).
One of my favorite characters was a NE rogue -- which the characters didn't figure out for quite some time, until I left them all to die (you know... ). Some small moral qualms, since a few of them were my friends, but generally gold solves all.
quote:
I don't like to have a PC that is female either. Cross gender roleplaying is not a thing for me, and I know very few that do it well. THough I will say that generally females are better at cross gender roleplay than males. Just from what I observed.
I once played a female character. One goofball in the party playing a male character, kept trying to start a romance going. I was completely unreceptive, and if I play a female character I am completely incapable of making her have any romantic interests.
As I've probably mentioned somewhere before, I tend to have half male characters and half female. It comes from mostly DMing, where you have to play all kinds of antagonists / supports, and you have to make up the female presence when your whole campaign consists of a bunch of guys who hate playing ladies.
My favorite, longest running character is female -- a CN rogue, a demure yet intemperate woman who was as likely to run from battle as distract (gulp!) the enemy or sneak off to find treasure / seduce the main enemy. Why? Charisma, baby. She only became better at it in 3e.
This character also ended up married to one of the other PCs (a buddy of mine), but that was due mostly to a love potion scheme gone awry. Basically, my character got tired of not instantly having her will obeyed and decided to make the party mage fall in love with her. It worked, and worked so well that he created (with his excellent intelligence and brewing skills) a love potion to use on her as well. And we all know rogues -- low wisdom, poor will saves, and low fortitude saves as well.
And it was no big deal. So our characters hung out fairly often, worked together on schemes (a rogue and an eldritch knight make a good team, I've found), got teased a little by the other PCs, and made an effort to save one another in combat (mostly him saving her if she got pinned down). Occasionally, we'd have the whole "kidnapped family members" quests, and it would be one PC or the other. They even had children eventually, and that wasn't a big deal either ('coure, it's not like we roleplayed the production side of things ).
It's a tribute to our respective roleplaying abilities that we were both able to play it well, believably, and it didn't get weird. (LARP might have been a little dicey, but we didn't cross that particular bridge )
Anyway, it's experiences like this that have helped me establish this negative capability thing. I find D&D is an excellent training ground for N.C.
My two coppers.
Cheers |
| Faramicos |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 15:46:39
Sounds like a true RPG challenge to play a Grandmother... How was it? |
| Kajehase |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 15:30:29
Granny Weathermax... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 14:50:08
quote:
Originally posted by Shadovar
I assume that kender in the realms is Emilo Haversack, am I right?
Emilo certainly does get around. I even recall a small mention of him in a 2e Ravenloft tome.
As for the subject of this scroll...
quote:
I've never played an evil character, nor a female. It's not that I have an aversion to either; I've just never had a concept I wanted to try out that was evil and/or female.
The evil character portion of Wooly's post is pretty much the same for me as well, although I've roleplayed two female PCs -- Granny Weathermax and Lady Kazandra .
|
| warlockco |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 10:19:14
quote:
Originally posted by khorne
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Kazandra
quote:
Originally posted by Shadovar
I assume that kender in the realms is Emilo Haversack, am I right?
Yes, you are.
Straight from the novel Tymora's Luck.
A kender in the realms? Oh dear...............
Yeah, there goes the neighborhood... |
| khorne |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 09:49:49
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Kazandra
quote:
Originally posted by Shadovar
I assume that kender in the realms is Emilo Haversack, am I right?
Yes, you are.
Straight from the novel Tymora's Luck.
A kender in the realms? Oh dear............... |
| Lady Kazandra |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 06:57:35
quote:
Originally posted by Shadovar
I assume that kender in the realms is Emilo Haversack, am I right?
Yes, you are.
Straight from the novel Tymora's Luck.
|
| Shadovar |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 05:54:17
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
You speak of the kender. I know I could never play one of those guys... Speaking of kender, there is one in the Realms...
I assume that kender in the realms is Emilo Haversack, am I right?
For what I prefer for my PC is a shade, shades possesses unique abilities that i found much to my liking. Alignment generally varies from NE to CE or CN, but mostly CN or NE. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 05:45:01
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I do have an aversion, though, to playing gnomes and halflings. I just don't get them, for some reason.
Halflings I can see causing problems, though I suspect I could play them. The high energy thieves with no fear (the race name escapes me rght now) I find harder to play. The DL name? Those short persons are strange indeed. Also connection speed makes it hard for me to play hyper actice. Table top also offers the problem of fast speech and fast action.
You speak of the kender. I know I could never play one of those guys... Speaking of kender, there is one in the Realms... |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 05:16:44
I generally don't like playing stunties at all.
Also let me clarify, I am talking about what characters you can commit to in the long term, not just play for a night. I can play any character for a night, I am talking about keeping the character for months or years.
|
| Kentinal |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 03:52:33
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I do have an aversion, though, to playing gnomes and halflings. I just don't get them, for some reason.
Halflings I can see causing problems, though I suspect I could play them. The high energy thieves with no fear (the race name escapes me rght now) I find harder to play. The DL name? Those short persons are strange indeed. Also connection speed makes it hard for me to play hyper actice. Table top also offers the problem of fast speech and fast action. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 03:28:13
I've never played an evil character, nor a female. It's not that I have an aversion to either; I've just never had a concept I wanted to try out that was evil and/or female.
I do have an aversion, though, to playing gnomes and halflings. I just don't get them, for some reason. |
| Melfius |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 02:56:13
I, personally, have no problems playing a truly evil PC. I have even gone so far as to DM a campaign that would have made the designers of The Book of Vile Darkness blush. With only one small incident, my players handled this situation quite well. |
|
|
