This thread talks about clichés and how to deal with them. This is in response to all those threads like, “those lame clichés that you never want to see in your game again,” or “lame thing players do to copy a movie…” (These are not the exact names of such threads). Note that this is only my vision of how clichés should be handled, and feel free to respond.
What is a cliché?
A cliché is an idea or image used so much that it has lost its originality, and become a banality; a thing that everyone has already seen or heard. A cliché can take the form of a character or character’s concept that is used too often. For example, the old and universally known wizard with the long beard, pointy hat, and long wooden stick. Let us call him Merlin. Another of these is a certain good-aligned drow fighting with two swords. A monster or monster’s concept that is very old and much exploited as the vampire seducer: Dracula, the lich king, the “I have no brain and I smash things” orc.
Another cliché type is a scene, or a place, which is often associated with other clichés. For example, the dwarves and the mines, the woods and the elves, the volcano and the red dragon. Another cliché type is an overly familiar situation, setting or puzzle. For example, you must destroy the artifact by throwing it in the lava, you must find the legendary sword to fight the demon -- because nothing else will hurt him, or you cast magic missile at the darkness (8-bit theater fans).
The facts about clichés
Like it or not, a game, or campaign, in D&D will always be filled with ideas that were taken from somewhere else. The reason for this does not come from a lack of creativity, it comes from the fact that every story, every plot and setting, sooner or later, will fall into those plots and storylines that already exist, and are known not only as cliché, but as “standard.” The fact is, every story has an idea or concept taken from another story. (If you want to have a list of those “immortal” plots or concepts that are considered “standard,” you can try to find the “big list of RPG plots” that have been published in dragon magazine -don’t know the number- by S. John Ross.)
D&D, as a role playing game, mostly inspired by old tales, great novels, movies and plays, is filled with thousands of clichés. I would go as far as saying that the entire class/race system is a cliché because of the way the abilities and possibilities of each character are so strongly influenced toward pre-made combinations (you can create a half-orc wizard…but face it, it’s going to be a lot harder than doing a half-orc barbarian, isn’t it?) However, that does not mean that it’s wrong, and that doesn’t mean clichés are there to slow the flow of creativity. The fact that those who choose to play dwarves will tend to be a bit more “aggressive” toward elves (cliché dwarves vs elves) doesn’t mean that every player who chooses a dwarf is going to play them the same way. On the contrary, I think that the fact that there are so many clichés, can be of great advantage, as much as it can be a disadvantage, for a game or a campaign. You just have to know how to use it right.
DM and cliché
Especially for the DM, the use of clichés can be very tricky traps, and can present a lot of trouble in a real campaign. Why is this? Playing D&D is not like watching a movie, or reading a novel. The players don’t have to follow the plan made by the DM, and will probably never do it exactly how he wanted. The players are not mindless puppets, and if a DM constantly uses and re-uses pre-made images or ideas seen in movies, novel, or video games, the players will find out, and will play accordingly. That is why the DM has to avoid clichés, especially when dealing with the plot/storyline and world creation, so that his players won’t know what is to come, and will be kept in suspense. That is when they will enjoy the game from the beginning to the end.
Example types of clichés that the DM has to avoid
The repeated cliché
These clichés include all those little details that seem to cause no problem to the game but are just annoying when repeated all the time. Examples: all bad guys wear black clothes, and all good guys wear white clothes. Why is this done? Is this possible that in the entire world, the only people who dress themselves in black are the bad ones? If this is the case, then what is the point of detect evil?
Clichés that do not consider the nature of D&D
A great example of this would be “the dying NPC”: a classic. The PCs arrive at the castle to find that everyone has been slaughtered, except one guard who has seen everything. Now the PCs want to know who is going to be their next opponent. So they ask the dying guard to describe the monster, and he answers something like “It was a…a huge…” and he dies. In a movie, this would make a great scene because it would keep the spectator in suspense, but in D&D its just going to turn into “What! How could he die, I almost wasted half of my healing spells on him! Plus three potions! I try to raise him with a resurrection spell. Why won’t this work? Ok…I did not want to come to this but…I cast a wish. Still doesn’t work…screw that, speak with dead…” Just try to explain to your players that none of this works.
This just makes no sense, unless a god or something similar is involved. If the players cannot make use of their abilities just because the DM wanted to create a scene of movie, it’s not fair. To turn yourself on a cliché doesn’t give you the right to suddenly change the laws of the world the PCs have been used to. Avoid those clichés.
This thing goes there
“Ok, let me see the map. A forest. Ok this has to be the Elven kingdom. I bet you a thousand GP that they will live in trees in a secluded part of the wood protected by hidden archers. They will not let us pass because we’re humans, and have a dwarf in our group…And here’s the mountains. Another thousand GP this will be the dwarves’ kingdom, you know, with great mines, a population formed mostly (about 95%) of men who all suffer from alcoholism and spend all day forging treasures and making joke about elves. Oh, and here is the Iceland, we’re sure to find a lot of barbarians there. They’ll look like Vikings, and wear animal fur as clothes, will be mostly brutal and stupid and talk like retards…except for the shaman, who’ll probably have some connection with the spirit stuff, and act like a doctor and a spiritual guide. Oh, here’s our destination: the black tower. You know, with an evil necromancer, a lot of undead, a land with no living creature, and an always dark and creepy sky…yep, that’s our destination. Where can you hire an assassin? The only place is within a large human city…” I suppose that you see my point.
Please, do not cage yourself in those clichés. They are as annoying as “the good drow wielding two swords” that every Dm despises (because being so unoriginal). You do not have to follow everything written in the book, and stop your mind to these rules. In fact, your campaign is probably going to be a lot more entertaining if you don’t. Avoid those clichés.
Players know nothing
This is the kind of cliché where you decide to fill a room with corpses and think that the PCs won’t realize that they will animate as soon as they enter. Similarly, you put a gem in the hand of a statue and animate it as soon as someone touches it. Another is putting a chest in a room and thinking that your players will never realize that it might be a mimic. Trust me, they will know. They are as intelligent as you are, and have probably seen as many movies, played as many video games, and read as many novels as you have, and will see it coming. A character in a novel might be panicked when he sees the giant humanoid with green skin heal itself and continue fighting, but that’s because the character in those stories are supposed to be unaware of what a troll is, not the pc. You have to avoid such scenarios, and never think that you can trap your players with situations in which they have already seen elsewhere. Avoid those clichés.
BBEG clichés
These regroup all the clichés surrounding bosses and final encounters. Believe me, there are a lot. The most obvious one would be “the BBEG has to be stronger than all his/her underling.” This is completely wrong. A leader does not have to be a champion who owns his position through combat or higher magic power. If he is charismatic and intelligent, he will know how to manipulate others without having to enslave them. That is the power of the BBEG.
Other clichés of BBEG to avoid also include: the invincible monster with only one weak point. Usually, only an artifact may hurt such kinds of BBEG, which is wrong because once again, it doesn’t let your players use their own power to fight it. You should let your players fight the beast without the artifact if they want to. It’s just going to be harder.
Or the “you kill him twice…but he’s still coming back” cliché, where no matter how many times they face the baddy, he’ll keep coming at them, and be even stronger than before. This kind of cliché is very annoying for a player because it makes them feel useless. Therefore, you need to have real good argument to use it, or your players might think there is no way for them to win and just give up.
Another is “the one you thought was weak is uber-powerful.” This is where you make fun of the player using, let us say, a simple little girl, a kobold, a senile old man, or even a rabbit (quest for the holy grail) as a BBEG by boosting him with templates and/or magic. This cliché is dangerous in that your players are not going to be fooled twice, and will probably be suspicious with every encounter in the future, which might greatly slow the game, or make them feel very weak.
(Dm: Marcus tells you about his sick grandmother who might have information on the ghost of sir Wallas you want to fight. –Player: No way! I won’t go anywhere near a «sick and innocent» old weirdo! Not after this half-fiend vampire hags who attacked me just two days ago, pretending to be one of the refugee! –Dm rolling eyes: …oook, aren’t we getting a bit paranoid today? –Player: You would not say that if a «cat» has thrown a fireball at YOU the same morning…)
Another cliché is “the one you thought was your friend betrayed you,” which is a very old one. The only problem with this cliché is that if you use it too often, the players won’t want to have NPCs as friends in your campaign anymore, and this will greatly affect their role play, often for the worst. If you don’t want them to have permanent allies, that’s your choice…but it’s quite unrealistic to have no friends, anywhere, in the entire world, isn’t it?
What about the archetype BBEG? You know, those monsters that seem to always be the BBEG and always live at the same place. For instance, the evil necromancer who turned into a lich, and lives in a dark castle protected by undead minions, the red dragon who protects his treasure, and doesn’t move from his volcano because he sleeps all day. Let us not forget that they are always wearing the same thing; a dark robe with a hood that covers the face of the spell caster, the black armor with many spikes that protects the dark knight…does this remind you something? These clichés also affect your players because over the long term, it might annoy them to always see the same challenge, and the same kind of enemy. Try to be a bit more original than this.
Other clichés of such BBEG can also be found in Peter’s evil overlord list, so check it out.
A three year old heard that cliché
These are the uber-clichés. For instance, the evil dragon has kidnapped the princess, and you need rescue her. The long forgotten demon will arise from the gate of hell and destroy the world, so you must find the artifact to go fight him. We must slay the dragon because he burned down the village. The orcs prepare to invade the village. The little girl dressed in white is the BBEG. This baddy killed my mother, bring me his head and you will be paid. I have the one ring. These are the types of clichés you have to avoid, or at least modify in some way because if you don’t, you’ll end up with a boring and very predicable campaign. Avoid those clichés.
The benefits of cliché, for DM
On the other hand, one can agree that there is some sort of benefit to using clichés in a game or a campaign. Why are they good? Because that is exactly what your players want you to do.
Perverting cliché
A good way to surprise your players, and to use pre-made ideas or clichés to your advantage, is to actually let your players think that you are going to follow the idea, and then, change a part of this idea. If your players think that they know what your doing because “Oh boy, its so cliché,” then they will surely let their guard down. That is when you have to strike. An old man walks down the road with a pointy hat, a long white beard, a long wooden stick decorated with a white gem, and an old book on the side of his belt. “It’s a mage…no doubt about it…” Wrong!! This is the leader of the local monk circle with a hat to protect his head from the sun (damn, are the mages the only ones to protect themselves from the sun), a walking stick and a book full of his homemade poems. It could also be a disguised rogue, a warrior under the effect of a “hat of disguise” (or just an old warrior who did not wear his armor that day), or just a stupid old fool who tough people would respect him more if he looked like a mage.
In the middle of a swamp, a party of PCs come to find an old hermit who has been known to have a lot of information concerning the new weapon of the lich queen. So they enter the swamp, find the old, decrepit house of the hermit, and found out he’s gone. There is a long line of fresh blood covering the floor, disappearing to the lower floor. “Oh boy, a old decrepit house, trace of blood leading downstairs…something has to wait for us down there…it’s always happening like that in the movies.” Except for one thing, the DM has so many different monsters in his bag, what exactly is this going to be. The “what exactly” is the most important part. The players know that something lurks down there, and then their imagination just takes the lead. That’s when it gets on their nerves and drives them crazy.
“It’s going to be troll! I know it’s going be a troll, I just lost my flaming longsword!” “Shut up! I’m sure it’s going to be undead…after all, it did bring the corpse of the hermit…to eat it!” If you really want to surprise them, think about the possibility that wouldn’t come to their mind, and go for it (man, I had so much fun level draining these PCs with this wraith hidden in the floor by making touch attack through their boots…hilarious to see how they were freaked out to descend downstairs).
A young woman is about to be killed for the murder of innocent. The PCs arrive and think, “Ah, I’ve seen that a thousand times…so basically, she’s innocent and we must save her and discover who killed those farmers. Man, this DM so predictable…» Silly players… the fact that I’m using an image you’ve already seen somewhere else doesn’t mean I can’t use it to surprise you. Instead of using the cliché of “finding the true killer,” use your imagination and try to figure out what are the possible explanations of this situation.
A) She was clearly innocent and someone else killed them.
B) She has been forced/charmed/possessed and had no possibilities of not doing it.
C) Someone took over her physical appearance and did the job.
D) There’s never been any murder, and the people “killed” that night just wanted to get rid of the girl, and planned their own assassination.
E) She lied from the start, and she did kill those people.
Then, twist things up and mix them. It will give you something like, “The brother of this girl found out an ancient sword of great intelligence and great malevolence that has been created to kill non-chaotic people… such as this girl. He instantly falls under its control. Now, the sword decides to kill the girl but, after a long moment of careful thought, the sword decides that it would be terribly ironic and satisfying to use a bunch of very lawful characters, (the judge and jury), to get the girl killed for it. Therefore, he used the body of his new host, and stole a “hat of disguise” to take the physical appearance of the girl and go on a killing spree. Of course, the sword makes sure that there are a couple of people looking during the murder…” The cliché of «find the true assassin» remains, but using that technique you’ve managed to alter the story so greatly that your players just won’t care.
Cliché as reference
Especially for new players, the concept of role-playing may be a bit hard to understand at the beginning. Without any reference, and face to face with a new character’s concept, a new type of challenge or puzzle or whatever, a player may not know how to react and so, may not be able to role play good. That’s is where the clichés help. It is easy to play a good, old pointy hat wizard of fifty years old. It is a lot harder to play a gnomish wolf rider barbarian/druid hunting for ghosts. It is easy to understand the concept of dragon = very tough, but it is a bit harder to understand that a half-fiend paragon Minotaur ranger with an intelligent Vorpal sword and a beholder’s graft eye of finger of death = also very tough. In those situations, the clichés become the basis on which the new players rely when playing. That is where you can use them to your advantage. By modifying them, you can surprise your players, but you must also keep in mind not to destroy them. Surprising your players doesn’t mean that you have to throw bizarre, alien, unknown beasts at them all the time, or always trap them by using (it’s another cliché by the way) “the one you thought was your friend wants you dead” because you might just be making them paranoid.
Clichés attract new players
Don’t deny it. Most of the time, people who play D&D started because they had a crush on those old but always so delightful clichés that so many movies used all the time. The old demon wrapped in flames might seem like an overused image… but I don’t think that any D&D fan that has seen the Lord of the Rings movie did not let a “Wooow!” when they saw it on the screen for the first time. That is why it is important to let some of these cliché elements in the game. I don’t know for you, but if a new player comes to my table and ask about hell, I’m not going to tell him that I decide every devil that lives in hell (not just a layer--all of them) resides in an ice palace just to avoid the “wrapped in flames” cliché of the devil. Now, I know this may seem funnier for DMs to throw away such pre-made ideas, and I perfectly understand that many clichés have to be destroyed to create “something new and tasty,” and I totally agree with that. All I’m saying is that they should not, at least, be forbidden or suppress clichés just for the originality side. To live in such a cliché (as for the example, to fight the demon wrapped in flames) is one of those things that appeal to the new players.
Also, I would not recommend that DM punish or get angry against those (often new) players who, by a lack of originality, or because they have a real admiration for it, tend to use cliché characters to create their own. Being able to create a solid, completely new kind of character concept is not an ability that everyone possesses, and blaming those who are not able to do it is, I think, quite rude and unpleasant. But, if this really bothers you, explain it to the player, and talk to him about helping him create his own style. You don’t have to push them. Eventually, they’ll get bored of copying cliché characters all by themselves. Moreover, the Dm can also greatly benefit from such clichés, and turn them into his advantages!
The cliché and the players
The players can also greatly suffer or greatly benefit from the use of clichés. Especially when they create their character and role-play him/her. Here’s how;
Clichés that players should avoid
The clone
”I’m an old wizard…a bit crazy and confused, who often forgets his own name and don’t seem to fear anything. And when my hat falls on my eyes, I act like I’m blind...” Yes, right, your Fizban, here’s who you are. This means that you made no effort to create your own character, you just copied it. It also means that you would have copied Drizzt if you decided to play a good aligned drow ranger fighting two-weapon style.
My question then would be; why? Why bother playing a character that already has a unique and clearly defined personality and style?
As a player, it is one of your privileges to create a new and colorful character so that he can become your character, not just a stolen idea that you’ll never be able to fully copy and imitate. You think it will make you stronger to play Drizzt? No, it won’t! In addition, everything you’ll accomplish with this character will be accomplished by something that doesn’t come from you and so, will never be as tasty. You’ll never get the feeling of having created a unique and powerful character with the right to say “It’s MY character” using a clone. So my only advice would be--don’t do it.
The cliché background
“I’m a orphan. My parents were killed at war, and I have been raised by a stranger who made me become the rogue that I am today.” “What my background is? Hm, oh right! I don’t know because I forget everything that has happened until now!” “This baddy killed my father, and I became a warrior to avenge him…even though I’m pretty sure I won’t really encounter this baddy during the campaign.” These types of backgrounds clearly are cliché, and are annoying by the fact that, once again, the players made no effort to think of something just a bit different and unique. Do not use that kind of background if you want to avoid clichés, or at least, make sure you altered it enough so that someone using the same kind of background won’t look like he has the same.
Think about it for a second, it is your background, not just your memory of the past three weeks. If you think that “losing your memory” or “swearing to avenge your dead father” will help you get rid of it, you had better think again because an intelligent DM is sure to use that against you. “What do you mean the prince ordered my death? I did not steal that garment! Who is that girl that keeps looking at me with a six-year-old child at her side? –DM: I can’t tell you…you don’t remember!” “Ok, so James, as you walk down the street, you see a man and a child playing with a dog. Instantly, it reminds you of your fallen father, killed by the great pirate Horkana (the one you promised to kill, remember?), and how much you miss him… So, as you walk to the local inn, you are not able to find sleep that night because the image of his face affects you just as like a ‘Nightmare’ spell.”
Cliché role playing
”I’m a serious, cold-blooded warrior, a true loner who does not care about the others, and almost always make fun of my enemy by throwing little phrases like ‘you know your ugly’ before I killed them. Then, I’m almost always silent, and don’t seem to fear anything in life. And I never complain when I get hurt.” Ok, I know that many characters, especially in movies (like Blade, Hellboy and The Matrix) seem rather cool when they act like that on the screen, but once again, they are really, really cliché. Therefore, using such role-play all the time is not really recommended if you want to avoid clichés.
Of course, you can act like that occasionally, when you fight the leader of the orcs, and he’s trembling in his boots after he saw you exterminate his whole tribe all by yourself for example. Just don’t abuse this use of role-playing because it gets old rather quickly. Think about it, if everyone in your group is a cold-blooded loner, why are you traveling together, and why in the hell are you bringing a healer with you if you are so sure of your capabilities? Being part of a group means that you can’t be just a loner all the time. Playing D&D means that a cold-blooded loner won’t fit half the situations that the DM will throw at you. “I am a cold-blooded warrior, and I don’t fear anything!” DM, “Hmm, in fact you do, because you just saw the dragon and failed your save against fear.”
Other cliché role play would be;
1) The 10 INT barbarian who acts like he is a 3 INT barbarian (smash this, smash that, talk like a prehistoric moron)
2) The crazy obsessed/hyper-fanatic cleric (I go to war in the name of my god, I stole this sword in the name of my god, I order you to be silent in the name of my god, I go to the bathroom in the name of my god.)
3) The manga samouraï (I have a katana…I’m invincible!!)
4) The always mysterious one (no one ever sees my face because its covered with a huge hood)
5) The hyper-active halfling (I stole this! I stole that! I touch this! I don’t care about the guard, and keep pick-pocketing everything that falls in my hand!)
6) The paladin freak (This six year old, paralyzed, and mentally retarded child is evil! Kill him.)
7) The bard who can’t be a man (c’mon, I play music and like to dance. I have to be some kind of retard who fears everything, and don’t want to scratch my boots even though I have the higher charisma here, and I’m supposed to inspire the others.),
8) The evil psychopath (I’m evil…that mean I have to kill everyone for no reason)
And many others.
How players should use cliché
As players, you should use the clichés and images seen in the movies and novels only to get inspired by them. You can do it easily. Just take, say, three characters you really like and ask yourself, “Why do I love them that much,” and then, what could I add, so that I could love them “even more.” Let us make a example using a movie character, a novel character and a video game character; Gandalf, Drizzt, and Sephiroth (from FF7). Now, the three of them are cliché (the pointy hat wizard, the drow who has seen the light and become good, the katana-wielding warrior of incredible might). Why do you love them?
I know I love Gandalf because he’s a charismatic leader, a wise man who knows a lot, and a very determined person. I love Drizzt because of his cool background of coming from the darkness and turning to the light, the way he fights, and because he has this incredible panther with him which makes him even cooler. I like Sephiroth because he’s really powerful, really respected and feared, and because he has great hidden power.
Now, what would I change on those characters? As an example, I could say (even though this isn’t completely true) that I think Gandalf is a bit too weak, physically, and I prefer to play a fighter, so I’ll keep his personality and play a fighter. I know that I don’t want my character to be a drow because I don’t want to look suspicious in every city I go, and I don’t want to fight with two weapons because I want to use my feat to develop a character fighting with a sword and a shield. However, I really like the idea of having an animal companion to help me, so I’ll ask the DM if I can start with, let’s say, a dog and switch for a tiger eventually. I also don’t want my character to be evil, but I really want him to have hidden power, so guess I’ll take a few levels of spellcaster with my fighter character.
Now, what do you have? A wise and very charismatic warrior who knows a great deal, fights with a shield and a longsword and does not go anywhere without his old St-Bernard, Medo, and hides most of his magical power to surprise the enemy in the heat of the battle. There, you have everything you wanted!
Final advice
Clichés are a part of D&D. You can’t break all of them--that’s impossible. However, if you manage to use clichés to your advantage, you should be just fine. Just remember that novels, movies, and video games that generate such clichés are there clearly to inspire you, not to dictate to you how you must play your game or build your world. Even if a book says that X monster does X thing, you always have to remember that those who wrote the book did not write it in stone, and do not obligate you to follow their vision of a thing.
Imagination is a thing with no limit; use it.
PS. I must give a special thanks to Shadowmagyk, he helped me a lot. Thanks man.
:D
If the players haven't read the book/seen the movie/played the game you're cliching (That can't possibly be a word), then it's defined as an original idea. I once played a 4 month campaign based upon an ancient computer game that no-one else had heard of. Everyone loved it, and my effort was only limited to translating everything into D&D.
Excellent read though, kudos.
Now the good aligned drow wielding two weapons is a cliché, Drizzt is not since he's an original character that continues to evolve in his own story. The pointy hatted wizard is a cliché, Gandalf is not since he sort started the whole pointy hat thing, and finally the katana wielding nutter who can kill anybody isn't a cliché, its dumb.
aldo nadi
greatest swordsman of our times
I had an NPC (in Hell, actually) who was a stereotypical demon knight- black plate armor, big hellsword, black steed and very dodgy looking. They expected a grand evil speech. He said, (in a bored tone), "I am the great evil champion of the demon lord etc...ohh, I couldn't be *bothered*. Why are you idiots running around Hell anyway?" This threw them more than I thought it would have. He was an apathetic champion of evil, bored with immortality and cynical about everything, but he was still a champion of evil.
Their logic was, if he was evil, he would have smacked them or at least threatened them. In fact, he was too lazy to attack them, and guessed that they would kill him. So after talking, he just said, "Here, take this item. I hate my patron anyway. Call my name and I'll come." So, later, two of the PCs were split up, and they called him, expecting help. He arrived and killed them both and wandered off. Just goes to illustrate that even when using a cliché, you can be a little original.
Think about it for a second, it is your background, not just your memory of the past three weeks. If you think that “losing your memory” or “swearing to avenge your dead father” will help you get rid of it, you had better think again because an intelligent DM is sure to use that against you. “What do you mean the prince ordered my death? I did not steal that garment! Who is that girl that keeps looking at me with a six-year-old child at her side? –DM: I can’t tell you…you don’t remember!” “Ok, so James, as you walk down the street, you see a man and a child playing with a dog. Instantly, it reminds you of your fallen father, killed by the great pirate Horkana (the one you promised to kill, remember?), and how much you miss him… So, as you walk to the local inn, you are not able to find sleep that night because the image of his face affects you just as like a ‘Nightmare’ spell.”
"An intelligent DM"? No, that’s a very dumb DM. An intelligent, good, nice DM works the background over with the player, incorporating it into his game. Saying that an intelligent DM would do something like that is just wrong.
Otherwise, nice article, but I REALLY did not like that part.
thank you very much..."An intelligent DM"? No, that’s a very dumb DM. An intelligent, good, nice DM works the background over with the player, incorporating it into his game. Saying that an intelligent DM would do something like that is just wrong.
Otherwise, nice article, but I REALLY did not like that part.
Ok, that's another point of view I totally respect. However, what I was trying to say (and obviously was misunderstood) was that originality goes both ways. See, if a DM use cliché all the time, the players will have serious clues on what's to come and will be able to counter the plans of the DM. But who can blame him? The DM has to make up the whole plot, NPCs, design every challenge, trap and fight out there. So sure, he has to take some ideas from somewhere. But it won't change the fact that the players will have an advantage over him every time they'll respect what's to come.
On the others hand, what do the PCs have to make? A character's sheet, a background and (for some) minis. From my point of view, if a bit of originality is not found there the DM has every right to use his advantage and use their background against them. I don't say you have to do it. I just say it's an option to promote originality and punish a lack of work (because I was clearly aiming at players who really don't care about their backgrounds and invent everything to get rid of it).
If you don't care about their background, then everything is perfect! ;)
I just really bored me not to see any new backgrounds from my players, when I have to design a new adventure every week. . .
Personally, I think that it doesn't matter if its cliché or not, as long as in the end, the players are challenged and interested. If it doesn't seem cliché to the players, what does it matter? Then again, I have an awesome group. But my players have come to take each experience with a grain of salt. The dragon and the princess might be working together to scam her father, the princess might actually have secret spellcasting powers and has charmed the dragon, may have just simply become friends with it and want to go adventuring with it, or it could have just simply kidnapper her to eat her soon.
Clichés are useful because sometimes your players become so used to a cliché situation never having a cliché ending that when one happens it takes them by surprise. Clichés are even better when the players uncertainty of cliché versus non-cliché becomes so evenly balanced that they don't take anything for granted or assume anything.
Just my two coppers.
Shinryouga
“Ok, let me see the map. A forest. Ok this has to be the Elven kingdom. I bet you a thousand GP that they will live in trees in a secluded part of the wood protected by hidden archers. They will not let us pass because we’re humans, and have a dwarf in our group…And here’s the mountains. Another thousand GP this will be the dwarves’ kingdom, you know, with great mines, a population formed mostly (about 95%) of men who all suffer from alcoholism and spend all day forging treasures and making joke about elves. Oh, and here is the Iceland, we’re sure to find a lot of barbarians there. They’ll look like Vikings, and wear animal fur as clothes, will be mostly brutal and stupid and talk like retards…except for the shaman, who’ll probably have some connection with the spirit stuff, and act like a doctor and a spiritual guide. Oh, here’s our destination: the black tower. You know, with an evil necromancer, a lot of undead, a land with no living creature, and an always dark and creepy sky…yep, that’s our destination. Where can you hire an assassin? The only place is within a large human city…” I suppose that you see my point.
Please, do not cage yourself in those clichés. They are as annoying as “the good drow wielding two swords” that every Dm despises (because being so unoriginal). You do not have to follow everything written in the book, and stop your mind to these rules. In fact, your campaign is probably going to be a lot more entertaining if you don’t. Avoid those clichés.
I will have to disagree with this section.
I personally don't believe that elves living in trees in a secluded part of the wood, or dwarves living in mines and drinking a lot are clichés. They may be stereotypes, but not clichés. Furthermore, I don't consider this a bad thing.
It is sort of like saying it would be cliché for you to have prairie dogs living in burrowed holes in a grassy field. Or saying that colouring a firetruck red in a colouring book would be cliché. Sure, not all firetrucks are red, but the majority are, and using red would be "standard" or "typical" but not "cliché".
As such, the standard or typical elven community would be in a forest in the trees, and the typical dwarf would enjoy his ale and live in mines. This is the cultural heritage of these demi-humans, I don't see why we should stray from this.
Even attempting to avoid a cliché is just another cliché. Originality is the art of concealing your source (and I won't tell you where I got this from!) and every book that has been written is a reflection on another book. It may be clichéd of me to do so, but I will quote C.S. Lewis on originality:
Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.
I personally don't believe that elves living in trees in a secluded part of the wood, or dwarves living in mines and drinking a lot are clichés. They may be stereotypes, but not clichés. Furthermore, I don't consider this a bad thing.
I agree with this. It can be fun to do things differently, but D&D is not just about offering players with surprise after surprise. In fact, stereotypes such as those mentioned above make up for the lack of knowledge we all naturally have about the fantasy worlds we play in (compared to our knowledge of the real world). Stereotypes can, in effect, make a fantasy world seem more real, because they offer a sense of understanding of an otherwise alien world. In this way, using secluded forest communities of elves and dwarven mining complexes actually encourages good role-playing.
Besides that, nice article! I'll make sure to show this to my DM ;)
Thanks again! :D
However, I'd like to point out that I personally feel that if your campaign consists of a few clichés or so, but you and your players still have fun playing the game, or if you're a player and you create a cliché character, however, he's still interesting and you and the others have a good time with that character's antics, then that's perfectly fine. Everyone's having fun, and isn't that really all that matters? Isn't that why games like these are created?
Fantastic article, though.
For things to stand the test of time, they generally have to have some grain of truth to them, and when they have become a symbol, then you can use it in several ways. It can be a kind of shorthand; as someone else said, a way of recognizing a fantasy world. If something is a strong enough cliche to be worth avoiding, then the process of changing it just enough to not be cliche adds to its history and symbolism.
To use a non D&D example, I'm a fan of old musicals. The early ones especially follow a very predictable pattern. The very predictability allows you to focus on the more subtle differences - it's a case of "oh, here's the ensemble number where everyone finally pulls together" - and then, since you don't have to expend energy trying to put the whole thing together, you can focus on the little details, what was done well this time, what this particular play added to the canon.
I've also noticed that the more similar things and people are, the more their smaller differences matter. If people follow a few conventions and are similar in some ways, then things like personality and background make a much larger impact - the smaller details don't get lost in the larger ones. So cliches can sometimes frame a story in such a way as to give people freedom to be more subtle.
These are just my random thoughts. Excellent article.
I personally don't believe that elves living in trees in a secluded part of the wood, or dwarves living in mines and drinking a lot are clichés. They may be stereotypes, but not clichés. Furthermore, I don't consider this a bad thing.
True, but if this is all that a DM can offer his players, then the campaign becomes predictable. It's the DM's job to create a complex living world filled with a variety of challenges. Cliches have their place, but they seldom make memorable encounters. ("Hey remember those Elves in the Dark Forest? They lived in trees, man... TREES!!")
Of course certain conventions and stereotypes are required. Those conventions define D&D by allowing the DM to exercise creativity within an accepted framework. They prevent the world from devolving into pure chaos, and may not detract from the playing experience as excitement is often found in the execution of the details anyway. However, predictability is the enemy of any game, and players should not be able to "solve" your campaign the way they would a video game. Heredom makes a good point that players should not be able to anticipate challenges simply by looking at a map or judge an NPC by appearance alone. Make them look deeper, and give them a reason to think about the situations they're in. An encounter does not have to be random or illogical, but it should be fresh and unpredictable in the same way that real life is (or should be...).
I enjoyed reading this article because it raised a problem that I didn't really see before, and then proposed an easy solution - combine ideas from different sources for your own original creation. If I could add to this suggestion, it would be to also look outside the heroic fantasy tradition for inspiration. Take environments / situations / characters from other types of movies and literature and adapt them to a fantasy setting. Science Fiction is easy to translate, but look to other genres for more unconventional ideas.
Or even better - adapt actual historical figures and events to create NPC's and political intrigues that resonate with realism. It may be a challenge to convert some historical events to a world of magic, and you may find that the modern technological age offers more parallels to the world of D&D than the Dark Ages model. Dig deep to find new ideas because much fantasy literature is already based on human history. But you can lift entire life stories to quickly create memorable PC's/NPC's. Millions of people in our world have lived through events that are stranger than fiction... if not quite strange enough for D&D...
Creating an interesting and original campaign or character is just like dungeon delving; the deeper you go, the greater the rewards.
And they focus on the character classes.
Cliché: Wizard = Older individual, bookworm, most likely to be found in a library.
Not Cliche: Young wizard thats hot headed, doesn't give a flip for books or hunting down bits of arcane lore. He has his 2 spells per level, and thats what he uses, because he made them up himself.
Cliché: Rogue = Sticky fingered thief.
Not Cliche: Rogue that has maxxed out people skills, and is the perfect con man. Or the Bounty Hunter who uses the skills of the thief against him. Or the Jack of All Trades that does a little of everything well. Just because you play a Rogue doesn't mean you have to have a single rank in Sleight of Hand, Move Silent, or Open Lock.
Cliché: Barbarian = Stupid uncivilized brute.
Not Cliche: Use the Barbarian mechanics to build a perfectly civilized, well-mannered city boy that suffers from Berserker rages. Think Incredible Hulk and Bruce Banner. Maybe even be a bit of a girly-man until you get mad, then you start beating the snot out of anything you can reach.
Cliché: Cleric = Walking Bandaid.
Not Cliche: Full plate wearing greatsword wielding holy warrior that wades into melee to kick your butt, and then heals himself after battle.
Cliché: Fighter = Full Plate and Sword
Not Cliche: A lightly armored archer thats afraid of getting hit in combat.
The list goes on and on. Just remember though, that the class descriptions given in the PHB are every bit as much of a tired old cliché as much of what the original poster said. Use the base mechanics of the class, and just forget about what the fluff text says. Sorcerers that cast magic because they're descended from dragons? Screw that, give yourself elemental blood and channel that! Be descended from an Air Elemental and just take spells that match the theme of thunder and lightning.
And perhaps the newest cliché of all, that you have to take PrC to get the character you want. Uh uh. If you can't play the character you have in mind with just some multiclassing of Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, and Rogue, and some roleplaying, then chances are that you're playing nothing more than a stereotype of your class and PrC. Playing a Half-Troll Drow Rogue/Fighter Assasin/Dragonslayer is not being original, you just slapped a bunch of numbers together, and you're miming some mish-mash of the stereotypical stuff in the book says.
And that, just maybe, is the biggest cliché of all, that you need races and classes at all to play the character you want. Your character should define your stats. Your stats should NEVER define your character.