Okay, so me and my friends have had a game going on for a couple months now, and recently my character has died. I have played 2 rogues in my life, but they were my longest lasting charachters. So for the past few sessions they've been making me play different classes, and I die every time. Should they be aloud to only restrict rogues from me? Or is it ok that they dont care if i die every session. I need help, because its unfair in my oppinion that just because i play the class often, im not aloud to have any fun playing this game.
Ever since my last rogue died, Ive played, a Druid, Wizard, Artificer, Paladin, Bard, Cleric, and Ranger. nothing is as fun as my rogue was, is my party being unfair?
Yes! You play what you want to play. End of story. Case closed.
If you were in my game and had played 10 rogue characters before, I might suggest trying a different class.
But I would never force you, and looking at the list of classes you've tried I would definitely not stop you from playing what is obviously your favourite class.
Tactical_Saber wrote:
It's fine for your group to encourage you to try out something new, since you won't know if you like it or not until you try it (though you might guess you won't like it, and be guessing correctly, you don't actually know).
It is not at all acceptable for them to force you to play something you aren't enjoying, and you should not tolerate it even if it means you have to find yourself another group to game with.
Among a reasonable group, such as mine is, your preference for playing rogues would be welcomed by the other players in the same way that they welcome one of our players always plays a dwarf (well, all but in rare cases that total 1 human character that has actually happened and a claim that if the story of the campaign required every character to be the same race, he'd be okay with it even if it weren't dwarves) - it makes it easier for the rest of the players to decide what they want their character to be becuase they have that reliable bit of info about what else will be in the party.
I sense there is more to this story than you are telling. It is easy for us to say that what you are describing sounds absurd based on the information provided. However, this piece specifically has me a little curious "is my party being unfair?". I highly doubt they are doing it just to be mean and for no reason.
reddaemon wrote:
If your other characters have all been killed every time you play a different class, what makes you think that a Rogue class would survive whatever is killing them?
In fact, what is it that has been killing them so regularly? If your DM has some sort of mad on and will just kill any character of yours, you should probably walk away from the table for a bit. If you're just being petty, and deliberately getting your characters killed, you should probably do that as well.
Captain_Kobold wrote:
In any case, it sounds like something to discuss with your party members and/or DM in private, not a public forum. I would start with inquiring as to why they don't want you to play that particular class. Once you know the reason why (assuming you don't already know), you can facilitate discussion to compromise on allowing you to play that class under conditions that both you and the rest of the table find agreeable. If you are all a reasonable bunch, I'm sure an agreement can be reached.
For example(and I'm not accusing you of this or anything, just speaking generally), let's say a table of friends has had bad experiences with people that have played Rogues in the past and they invite a new player to the table and say no Rogues allowed. The new player negotiates that he will make a good aligned rogue and that he will not steal from the party or sleight of hand loot as a compromise. Assuming this example doesn't apply to your table, adapt your interaction with them based on their reasoning.
We have a guy we refuse to let play anything remotely melee focused. He pretty much always plays a dwarven fighter, and then bitches the entire game when an enemy rolls to attack him, or whenever he takes damage.
We generally don't let him play at all, but when someone insists we have to, he rolls a dwarf fighter, and we make him reroll something not in melee. That way he can play a caster or an archer or something, and can go hide during fights while pretending we didn't notice him go hide.
I used to play with someone who always played an elven ranger with the same name.
Every time he had to roll a character, it would be the same elven ranger with the same name.
I do not mind someone playing the same class over and over again. I don't even mind them playing the same class and race combination, but for frack's sake at least try to make it seem like your character isn't the same person 
Breefolk wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Ok well my party doesnt usualy have anybody to play a rogue. My plaadin died of sufacation because of a bad roll!,so maybe it is the dm, but he seems to be rocking the story plot. i just play a rogue better, im more of a backstab, then run guy. i know classes like monk and such are like that too, but i dont get why its only rogues. ive played just as many wizards and druids as i have rogues. most of my deaths are because the party isnt really a team, but were working on it.You all have really helped me in this matter
Thanks!-Tac_Sab
PS. i was mainly a skill character such as a bard, when i was my rogue. so my rogue was more useful. also thats probably why i liked only rogues so much, the slight of hand and all. but anyway, thank you all, il confront the party, see if we can make a comprimise!
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Breefolk wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
The group I was in at University had a rule that new characters had to be different classes, because we all felt that playing the same class over and over was a bit lame.
What you and your group agree to is between you and your group. Not sure what asking the internet is going to do for you.....
MechaPilot wrote:
Breefolk wrote:
I think it's like going to a restaurant repeatedly and Person A having an issue that Person B always orders the same thing. I'm sorry that that lessens the dining experience for Person A, but please mind your own ____ business.
lall wrote:
Everyone does affect other's experiences at the table. Perhaps Persons A-C don't like the fact that Person D always wears purple to the games, or always drinks Pepsi, or always chews gum. Could Person D PLEASE stop and think about how he is ruining it for Persons A-C? What an outrage!
lall wrote:
Who would want to play with them? Life's too short.
It is frustrating - as a player and as a Dm - for another player to continually play the same character over and over again because that is an indication that said player has zero interest in interacting with either the other characters or the game world. The character does not grow and contributes nothing to the story. The player is, in effect, taking the opportunity to play solitaire and taking up the time and energy of the other people at the table to do so.
It takes time to listen to the character's exposition, thoughts, and ideas - which everyone already knows; it takes time for the player to declare and describe in detail his character's actions - even though everyone knows that he has no tolereance for Elves, and is going to do that 'cool' backfilp trick with his double-barrelled crossbow; and, it takes time to resolve those actions.
Unless the Player brings a lot to the table - I can easily see being frustrated by the character.
Bumpo wrote:
Kayal wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
I am not going to say that repeating the same character is BadWrongFun and shouldn't be allowed.... but I will say it makes me enjoy the game less. Makes it feel more silly, and that the player just doesn't care as much. If enough players feel this way, then it is a matter of who's enjoyment takes precedence....... If its only me, then I suck it up or leave. If its everyone but that player, then he either sucks it up or leaves. If the feelings are mixed... then things get trickier.
I've played the same Race/Class combinations before but I always give them distinct names and personalities. In fact, I would say I spend more time thinking about names than any other part of character creation. Despite the fact that my group isn't super serious (we joke around at the table ALOT and sometimes it gets difficult to determine what is and isn't OOC) but we generally agree that despite the occasional comic relief, we are telling an epic story about mythical heroes and so we treat them as such by coming up with rich personalities and unique characters because that philosophy enhances everyone's immersion into the game world. Enhancing the immersion makes it easier to get back on track after the laughter has died down from the previous joke.
I agree with Coredump. The needs of the group outweigh the needs of any single player. If breaking immersion brings the overall enjoyment down for the whole group (as it would with my group) or a large enough subset of the group, then that needs to be resolved even if it means parting ways with a particular player for the duration of the current campaign. My games live or die based on whether or not I can find enough players to play, so anything that threatens to cause a mass exodus must be prevented, even if it means seeking a replacement for Bob IV - Bob X.
Greenstone.Walker wrote:
Bumpo wrote:
Bumpo wrote:
Serpine wrote:
Kayal wrote: