Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Azar_of_Faerun 01-16-07, 04:48 AM	Just kidding! :) What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter typically), how compromising are you? Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your place in the group with fulfilling your duties?
CaoSlayer 01-16-07, 04:51 AM	I mold the class to my tastes or at least I try a hybrid class able to do the role (ranger or paladin in place of fighter by example).
CzarGarrett 01-16-07, 09:49 AM	So long as I'm told what is needed before I make a character, I'm good. I pride myself on being able to play any type of character. But its more than passingly difficult for someone to play a main arcane caster if they're a rogue. I need to know that an arcane caster is necessary before I make a rogue.
Aryxbez 01-16-07, 10:07 AM	Well I usually just endure and find a way to entertain my self with the character. Usually by roleplaying him in a way that I like.
BW0222 01-16-07, 10:08 AM	Azar_of_Faerun, >What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up >party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either >aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter >typically), how compromising are you? Well, most players enjoy new challenges and playing a class you aren't accustomed to is often a challenge. Try a wizard if you are used to front-line fighters, try an archer build, or a stealthy character, etc. Even if you don't normally like doing so, it often challenges folks. That said, a lot of players simply can't play character who they are not happy with. They get bored, really aren't up to the roleplaying challenge, try using them inappropriately, etc. Often it can also be a challenge to play with certain 'key' roles missing in the party. How would folks work without a rogue, a cleric, or a front-line fighter? Can we get by using the wizard for opening locks, the bard an a wand of cure light, and the druid's mage armored wolverine as a front-line? >Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your >place in the group with fulfilling your duties? I never like looking at set duties. Folks bring what they bring to the table and you then see if you can adjust your strategies to handle them. If thinks are going really bad, then maybe you have to rethink things, but a good DM is usually going to adjust the encounters based on the PCs involved.
Seghan 01-16-07, 10:13 AM	It all depends on the game for me. Sometimes the emphasis is far more on the "game" aspect. Then, I always try to keep my role similar, if the execution is not always the same. That is to say, if I need to be an arcane caster, I prefer to be the guy with the support spells rather than the artillery. If I play the heal-bot, I will emphasize all my combat ability to healing then use what is left over to build in town social skills. And usually I play a rogue or bard face-man. Sometimes, the role-play is more important than the game aspect, in which case we all pick characters independent of party needs.
aotrscommander 01-16-07, 10:24 AM	I have yet to encounter, in D&D at least, a type of character I can't enjoy playing. In fact, I try to have as wide a range of character classes as I can and encourage my players to do the same. About the only thing I might struggle with is if I had to play one of D&D's 'weird' races (which for me means pretty much outside Core!) But even then I'd probably adapt. It's generas not characters that I have problems with sometimes...
Hack and Smasher 01-16-07, 10:30 AM	My advice is play what you want rather than what is needed. But if your begin pressured into playing a cleric (lets face it no ever needs a bard, and fighter is so replacable it not funny). Say fine but don't complain about it. Take evil cleric of a god which is pro scarifice and go for it. Hijack undead with rebuke, use a longspear and fight from the second rank, sacrafice captured creatures, make minions, demand a wand/scroll fund which for nessities like CLW wand, remove x scrolls coz you anit preping them and its not coming out your cut. Be evil, sell out for power never be asked to play a cleric again.
Airos 01-17-07, 12:27 AM	My advice is play what you want rather than what is needed. But if your begin pressured into playing a cleric (lets face it no ever needs a bard, and fighter is so replacable it not funny). Say fine but don't complain about it. Take evil cleric of a god which is pro scarifice and go for it. Hijack undead with rebuke, use a longspear and fight from the second rank, sacrafice captured creatures, make minions, demand a wand/scroll fund which for nessities like CLW wand, remove x scrolls coz you anit preping them and its not coming out your cut. Be evil, sell out for power never be asked to play a cleric again. If someone were that disruptive in one of my games then they would never be asked to play again. I'm always amazed at the number of people that suggest "getting back at" or "getting even with" or "teaching them a lesson". The above suggestion is, I can't say wrong because every group is different, but it is at least a Richard Maneuver. Why shouldn't someone "complain" that they're being pressured into playing something they don't want to? I was under the impression that friends got together to play D&D, and that friends talked with one another when there was an issue, not "demand a wand/scroll fund". How's the rest of the group supposed to know that player doesn't want to play class (X) if he doesn't say so? Group: Sweet Jebus, Steve, why are you doing all this? Player: Because I never wanted to play (X) in the first place! Group: Then why didn't you say something? Someone else could have filled in the role. Player: Because I needed to teach you guys never to ask me to play (X) again! As a matter of fact, don't ever ask me to play anything, I'll choose my character! Group: Steve, you're being a douche. Stop it. Stop it now. If you're in a role you don't want to be in, talk to the group. If they understand you don't like playing (X) class, then they should be willing to work with you. If not, I would look for a new group. If you're in a role you don't know how to play, again talk to the group. If someone knows how to play class (X) ask them for guidance. If nobody in the group knows how to play that class hold off until you've gotten a few good ideas. Read novels, D&D Source books and these boards. You should never have to resort to acting like a jerk to make a point. If you do have to act like that, then the time for talking has long since passed and you should be acting like a jerk by slamming the door on your way out. Just my :twocents:
BlackZed 01-17-07, 01:08 AM	You should never have to resort to acting like a jerk to make a point. If you do have to act like that, then the time for talking has long since passed and you should be acting like a jerk by slamming the door on your way out. Just my :twocents: Those :twocents: are golden. My own :twocents:, I often take on the "duty" of class "x" as no one else wants to play that class. I proceed to have the time of my life playing.. say.. Well the most common example is probably the cleric. For some reason no one wants to be the healer. psh. For shame! If that's their attitude, I make it my personal goal to be the most awesome cleric in the history of game, so the next time we roll up characters everyone else fights over who gets to be the cleric. :ayyyy!: So not only did I enjoy the character endlessly, I opened someone else's mind to the potential of a class and am then free to roll up whatever that craze has left vacant.
High Octane 01-17-07, 02:44 AM	Your thread title made my left eye burst a blood vessel.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-17-07, 03:53 AM	Your thread title made my left eye burst a blood vessel. That's nice. After seeing many views and a fraction of those being responses, I imagine I made other aggressive posters leave the thread impotent in their quest for blood :) Regardless, it's an excellent attention grabber, so I used it to my advantage.
SonsOfKyuss 01-17-07, 07:00 AM	At first I thought the topic was "Help my paladin kill a baby!", but then I realized this wasn't the Char Op boards :D j/k I was under the impression that friends got together to play D&D, and that friends talked with one another when there was an issue... I guess... consider yourself lucky. Many people who play D&D are forced to settle for playing with people they aren't actually friends with, sometimes with people they actively dislike. Not that they are actually forced, but a small gaming community can limit people's options. Sometimes a game with people you aren't friends with is better than no game at all. And even if you are playing with friends, it doesn't mean you will always be friends with every person in the group. So really, there are circumstances where you might be playing in a game where people would be pressuring you to play a character other than what you would choose on your own, yet you don't really have the ability to talk it out with them or the will to walk away from the game completely. If people are being dicks (especially in game) as a way to push you into playing the role they want you to play, then I don't see a problem with being a dick in game in return, especially along the lines of demanding the resources (wand/scroll fund, etc) necessary to go along with that role. Personally, as a DM I have the most fun when the group doesn't try to fill every archtypical role. No rogue? Watch as the party goes to elaborate lengths to avoid traps! No face character? Watch the party go to extra effort to come up with creative stories rather than rely on a +50 bluff check. No primary spellcaster? Watch as the party hires a caster to come along only to find out that said hireling ironicly has a phobia pertaining to the challenge at hand! Hilarity ensues! When the old 2nd Ed PHB said "Don't give up on a character just because he has a low score. Instead, view it as an opportunity to role-play, to create a unique and entertaining personality in the game." I always thought it was BS. But when you apply that same type of logic to party composition, you can have great results. When the challenge can't be conveniently solved by a class feature of someone in the party, it can be a lot of fun to take the time to think through the problem and work it out instead of rolling a couple dice. I'll play a role that's not my first choice if it's necessary to the group or will greatly benefit them, but if I'm asked to play something that's completely off the list of what I was considering I will either modify something I was considering until it can at least partially fill the gap, or I will take whatever best fits the gap and modify it until it at least has a flavor of something I would be interested in playing otherwise.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-17-07, 08:04 AM	:weep: :) Thank you for your detailed response SonsOfKyuss :D
Airos 01-18-07, 12:11 AM	SonsOfKyuss, you've made some good points, and in a very articulate manner no less. ;) However, I feel compelled to make a couple of counter-arguments. I guess... consider yourself lucky. Many people who play D&D are forced to settle for playing with people they aren't actually friends with, sometimes with people they actively dislike. Not that they are actually forced, but a small gaming community can limit people's options. Sometimes a game with people you aren't friends with is better than no game at all. And even if you are playing with friends, it doesn't mean you will always be friends with every person in the group. You're absolutely correct with this. My personal experience has been both being friends with people first then bringing them into D&D as well as meeting a new group first then becoming friends with some of the people. Some of my friends I no longer game with due to life taking over, and some gamers I am no longer friends with, (and as a result no long game with). At any point in which I couldn't at least be on friendly terms with the group, however, I've made the choice to leave that group. I will disagree with the idea that a game with people I'm not at least on good terms with, friends or not, is better than no game. So really, there are circumstances where you might be playing in a game where people would be pressuring you to play a character other than what you would choose on your own, yet you don't really have the ability to talk it out with them or the will to walk away from the game completely. If people are being dicks (especially in game) as a way to push you into playing the role they want you to play, then I don't see a problem with being a dick in game in return, especially along the lines of demanding the resources (wand/scroll fund, etc) necessary to go along with that role. This is where I take the most exception to your views. If a person does not have the ability, (by this I am assuming you mean they do not know how to or does not have the confidence in themselves to), talk to the rest of the group, nor do they have the willpower to walk away from the group, then there are bigger problems than being "forced" into playing a character you don't want to. Perhaps the player is non-confrontational. This in and of itself is not a "problem", but then I'm sure they wouldn't be acting like jerks in game to "get back" at the rest of the group. Perhaps they're just shy. Again, not a problem but they again they most likely wouldn't act out against the party. A person that can and will act like a jerk in game for a situation that exists outside of the game is clearly confrontational, but is confronting the characters in a game, not the players in the room. They should be capable of talking like a civilized adult to the other players. That doesn't always happen, of course, but it should. If the characters, (in game), are being jerks, then by all means act like a jerk in return. If the players, (outside of the game), are acting like jerks, there's no reason to act like a jerk in return. Toughing it out because "it's the only game in town" isn't reason enough in my book to be treated in that manner. I wouldn't have fun in that situation anyways, so why bother? Is it really worth being abused for the sake of playing a game that you're not having fun playing because you're being abused? And I don't want to wander too far off topic, but I would like to make the point that if this thread were about anything other than D&D rules, I'm willing to bet the majority of replies would be along the lines of "leave the group far, far behind". If the players were being jerks about how you dress, how you talk, your gender, your race, your taste in music, your eating habits.... anything other than "You have to play this class". Being a jerk is being a jerk, and there's really no excuse for it. Just another :twocents:...
Nytmare 01-18-07, 11:55 AM	The group I play with tends to build parties that are grouped together for reasons other than the "We're making a well rounded adventuring party to go well rounded adventuring." They tend to be more along the lines of "Hey we're all playing dwarven monks stuck on a boat!" or "Let's be members of an arcane cavalry unit!" But those decisions are always made as a group, I can't remember a game where someone felt "stuck" playing something they didn't want to.
SonsOfKyuss 01-18-07, 11:45 PM	At any point in which I couldn't at least be on friendly terms with the group, however, I've made the choice to leave that group. I will disagree with the idea that a game with people I'm not at least on good terms with, friends or not, is better than no game. It's hard to disagree with that, but the one thing I can say is that a good DM and a buddy or two can turn an otherwise unfriendly group into a game worth sticking around for. If a person does not have the ability, (by this I am assuming you mean they do not know how to or does not have the confidence in themselves to), talk to the rest of the group, nor do they have the willpower to walk away from the group, then there are bigger problems than being "forced" into playing a character you don't want to. When I said "yet you don't really have the ability to talk it out with them" I meant because you had tried and failed for some reason (person pressuring you is too stubborn, etc). But overall, I agree with you. It probably is better to walk away from most bad situations. The point I was trying to make is that there probably are situations where I wouldn't hold it against a guy if he chose to respond to this kind of pressure by acting like a jerk. It won't cause me to suddenly gain a lot of respect for him, but I'm not going to automatically think less of him.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-19-07, 10:52 AM	Thanks guys, I decided to go Rogue after all. I hope it'll be a fun experience! :)
SonsOfKyuss 01-19-07, 06:42 PM	Lol, I hope so too. Sorry for hijacking the thread.
hmmmm 01-19-07, 11:50 PM	Have fun, and please next time relate your topic title to the content of your post. :)
Azar_of_Faerun 01-20-07, 12:51 AM	Have fun, and please next time relate your topic title to the content of your post. :) Sorry, no can do. You have to shock people to get their attention these days :)
kelvinaw273 01-20-07, 03:45 AM	A lot depends upon the DM and the group. If I am joining an established group my first question will be "What does this group need?" followed by "What source books are allowed?" I'll then build a character from there. But seriously, if the group and DM want all of the 'Primary Roles' filled (front-line fighter, skill-monkey, arcane caster and divine caster) you still have a lot of options: If they want a Cleric, you can ask to play a druid, spirit shaman or favoured soul instead. But the best advice is always "Play what you enjoy" even if you have to work around it somehow, it usually comes right.
metamind 01-20-07, 11:24 AM	Just kidding! :) Aww, that would have made an awesome thread. :(
Jagyr Ebonwood 01-20-07, 04:33 PM	I demand dead babies and paladins this instant. Don't make me sue for false advertising. I'm an American, I'm required to sue someone at least once a year.
Meshakhad 01-23-07, 12:08 AM	Well, there are not really any roles I'm uncomfortable with. I actually enjoy playing clerics in particular - at higher level, the cleric spell list is awesome! Secondly, in my particular campaign, we don't actually divvy up party roles that much. Since there are so many people in our campaign (6+) we just make whatever we want, then have the DMPC fill any missing vital roles (like cleric or rogue).
WizO_Cat 01-23-07, 10:22 PM	Ok, since this thread title is really just trying to troll for responses, then it is time to close the thread. Keep the titles of the thread on the thread subject. Thank you.