Problem is; everybody else wants to play it cautious. They're weiners! They won't say anything during an encounter with an unfriendly dragon because they're afraid of ******* him off. They're afraid to spread the word of rescue in a town of surfs because they're afraid of drawing attention.
I get a kick out of being the one targeted by the BBEG; he knows me by name and has never once neglected an attempt to attack me. He is, as it were, my arch-enemy. I don't mind sometimes actually ******* off the dragon, who then throws me and my friends into a dungeon because I accidently got a little too pushy in asking for his help. I don't mind having to rescue people I got into trouble in the first place; that's the lot of a hero!
However, I sometimes wonder... Do the other players secretly resent my position as the the instigator? Are they sick of rescuing me out of jams? Do they wish I'd be a little less 'there' all the time? Am I pushing the story forward, and making decisions (there have been times I've been called 'the leader' and there have been times I've been called 'the comic relief'), and taking risks when everyone else is unwilling?
I don't think I talk too much. Everytime an NPC tries to parlay with us, the DM looks at me, at which point I look around at the rest of the party to see if they'd like to say anything. Usually they don't; so I'll launch into my piece.
I've also got this habit of telling NPCs who're in the dark but would be more helpful if they knew more exactly what we're doing there and why. Some of the other players first reaction is to lie, but I often ask "why would we lie? We're not doing anything wrong! If he's an agent of the enemy then he already knows more than us anyways, and if he's not then maybe he's an ally, and we never make allies with people we lie to." Do you think this logic annoys the other players?
Hobgoblin: "What are you doing in the goblin-lands, Wizard?"
My friends: "We're hunting boars, brother hobgoblin, and we're having bloody poor luck! If you could give us directions to the Hymnsmount Pass we'd be on our way, and not bother you at all. We'll even trade some coin for the the information."
Hobgoblin: "There's no boar in the Pass! We of the Bloody Claw think you lie!"
Me: "Yeah, we lied. Truth is we're searching for a dragon who seems to have made his lair in the pass. He's been threatening the King, and we intend to beat his skull in and take his things; then return said things to our own lair."
My reasoning is that if the Hobgoblin is working for the dragon then we're about to learn something new, and if he hates the dragon we have a new ally and friend! When I do this my friends usually groan and slap their faces with their palms; but it always makes things happen. Sometimes it's a fight we could've avoided, but at least then we know we can't trust the hobgoblins.
So, the question; is it okay for me to continue to play the game the way I do? I understand that some groups are different, and while some combinations of personalities are okay in one group, other groups don't have room for someone like me or otherwise. Just please relate anecdotes that'll help me figure out whether I'm being a giant jerk or a moderate sized one.
Play however you like... but you wouldn't last long with us...
Your name is HATER so I don't know if I can take your opinion to heart.
It's not unusual to want to be the center of attention; it's perfectly natural, especially when playing a RPG where you won't suffer any real consequences (your character may get arrested, but you won't). But remember, everybody likes the spotlight, and deserves their time in it.
Problem is, I'm not sure they're being honest. I've got a pretty big personality and I'm afraid I'm bullying them. Sometimes when I play I take a more passive role, and we usually kind of coast by making roles when prompted. I feel like when I'm being the instigator I'm unfairly taking the spot-light and when I'm trying to give other's an opportunity to shine they're either resenting me for not lifting my weight or waiting for me to do the long drawn out monologue that has apparently become my watermark.
I either feel selfish or bored. I've played in other groups, and I sometimes take roles which are more or less instigator types. I'm not always a pusher, but I'm pretty much always a doer.
I would like to hear anecdotes about players who've seemed to be the resident motivater/instigator/leader/comic foil/moron/heroic type. If you can think of a time when it was okay to be pushy, that's good. If you can't, I'd like to hear stories about when it's bad.
*Besides, roleplaying an ass is no excuse.
I've asked, and they say 'no, it's okay, you're roleplaying*, we don't mind.'
Problem is, I'm not sure they're being honest. I've got a pretty big personality and I'm afraid I'm bullying them. Sometimes when I play I take a more passive role, and we usually kind of coast by making roles when prompted. I feel like when I'm being the instigator I'm unfairly taking the spot-light and when I'm trying to give other's an opportunity to shine they're either resenting me for not lifting my weight or waiting for me to do the long drawn out monologue that has apparently become my watermark.
I either feel selfish or bored. I've played in other groups, and I sometimes take roles which are more or less instigator types. I'm not always a pusher, but I'm pretty much always a doer.
I would like to hear anecdotes about players who've seemed to be the resident motivater/instigator/leader/comic foil/moron/heroic type. If you can think of a time when it was okay to be pushy, that's good. If you can't, I'd like to hear stories about when it's bad.
*Besides, roleplaying an ass is no excuse.
I tend to be the 'instigator', to a degree, in that I frequently play the Leader role and I seem to be the most tactically adept and most up on the rules. I tweak things a bit by basically pushing other people into the spotlight by showing them how they can do their job well (which is what Leaders do).
For example, last game I was in, we encountered a young Black Dragon. About halfway through the fight, he dropped his cloud of darkness on himself, which was going to screw us all hard. I had everybody fall back and take cover while our wizard carpet-bombed the darkness zone with Scorching Bursts (area and close powers aren't affected by concealment) until he came out of it.
If you're afraid you're overdoing it still, tone it down a little. Don't stop having fun, but just turn it down to, say 7 or 8.
Do YOU always want to be the center of attention or does YOUR CHARACTER always want to be the center of attention.
More significantly, does every character you play always want to be the center of attention?
If it's you, I'd tone it down. You probably are being considered annoying at best. In fact, I'd say it is almost impossible that they DO actually like you acting like that. Who knows, maybe if you read the threads here you'll find a post by one of them complaining about you.
And even if they don't mind just letting you have all the attention, did you ever think that maybe you are cheating them out of the opportunity to stretch themselves a bit outside of their comfort zone?
But if it's just this one character, go for it. And after the dragon eats you, try something different.
That said, as a DM I'd definately be annoyed - because the odds are that at least some of the gamers are being squelched by your tendency to run roughshod over every situation. If you sat down and shut up from time to time maybe some of them would find themselves pushed to take a more active roll and the game would be more fun for everyone (or at least everyone but you). And, not to be critical of your DM, but I think he should be taking a more active roll in getting the others involved. Rather than looking to you automatically he should be looking for reasons to directly involve the other players in these situations. Part of the role of the DM is to work to spread his attention around and not allow attention hogs to get their way.
Carl
If you're confident that this is a character-based personality, and not your own seeping into the game, then more power to you. Personally, I love gun-ho characters, both as a player and a DM. As you said, they're the ones who get things done, and get events rolling, and I can always count on them to advance the plot in certain ways.
In a way, it's a burden off the rest of the party, since they don't need to worry about being proactive while you're there, but on the other hand, you should be careful not to come on so strong that you preclude them from taking initiative.
If you've asked directly, and they've said they don't mind, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
There's a big piece of us in every character we play, but (according to your post) you've made one of your own dominant features the dominant feature of all your charcaters too. Sounds like you're not even trying very hard. I play with people who do that. If you're the extrovert you sound like you might get satusfaction out of expressing a different set of traits.
And for the record, you would annoy the hell out of me, but I would tell you. Happy gaming.
my .02
Are you part of a group or is it The lulzapalooza's Band?
Is it Bobowhacker the Fighter or lulzapalooza in scale armor?
Is every one of your characters played exactly the same way?
As for anecdotes.
I played a Rogue back in the day, who was a stereotypical sneaky sneak. He was going along just typically until he got smacked up side the head and left for dead, took the party almost a full day to find me. Afterwards he kept seeing people and hearing voices, usually his dead Grandpappy(who was known to the whole group and was a bit of a prankster) So there I was talking to myself for most of the game sessions, usually in whispers. Nothing like getting into an arguement with imaginary people when you are trying to sneak along. The Dm fell in love with it as soon as he realized he could do some really nasty things to me without even trying. The group about crapped their pants when my Rogue stood up from behind the wall and starts yelling to the imaginary to stop trying to point out where we were, right in front of the Ogres guarding the castle gates. I going along swimmingly until I made a blunder that one of the others picked up on. I was staring outside at.. and he asked what I was doing. I made the off hand comment of "just smelling the roses" Couple scribbled notes later and Bam, if my character smelled roses he wouldn't see things or hear the voices for a while.
Now how did all of this work? By the Dm. 90% of the time I would just be mumbling to myself unless he would call out a number which was my cue to look and see what that number meant on the sheet he gave me.
Now how did all of this come about? Because everybody else wanted to play it cautious. They could decide on what to do once I didn't come back for my scouting. They actually waited nearly a full day before they finally ventured out to see what happened. Which was me fighting a Gnoll getting my skull caved in but killing the gnoll in the process, me finally stablizing at -8 then having to wait for them to show or me dieing.
After a while the group started to have fun with it, we jelled as a group people started to take chances and stop playing like scared pesants.
I went from being known as Marikos to being known as Marikos the Roseman.
Prima Donna hogs the spotlight and doesn't let other people do things. They talk constantly, and get tired fast when someone else is off doing something for more than 10 seconds. An Instigator doesn't like when nothing (or not fast enough) happens, so he does sometimes crazy stuff. He is easily tempted by situations that look like they would react, like a big red button that says "Do not press."
From your description it sounds like maybe you are walking the borderline.
I am also a fairly "instigatory" type, insofar as I make decisions on what the next course should be pretty fast and want to go do them as a player. Sort of "the sooner we get started, the sooner we reap the rewards." I sometimes worry I am taking too much spotlight so I just stay quiet sometimes and look like I'm thinking or playing with my character sheets.
I will say though, that there are tricks to being an Instigator that prevent you from being (or at least coming across as) a "Prima Donna" or jackass.
Consider what it is you or the character want to happen, and think of a different way you can get that to happen. I'm not saying be manipulative; just find different avenues of pursuing the goal other than blurting out an action your character takes or something he says. Those other ways can usually be engaging the other players rather than just your character doing everything.
Let's say your group is at a crossroad and everyone's just standing there. Maybe they are afraid to speak up because you're the defacto decision-maker, or have no real insight so don't offer any up. But, instead of your character saying, "Hmm, my left side aches a bit, let's go that way!" and just choosing randomly, your character can say, "Hey Jim; which way do you think we should go here? I'm lost without a map."
Your goal is to go down a random path, but by engaging the other characters you at least get them involved and prod them to think about a direction. Now sometimes this might inadvertently start a long discussion, but as long as everyone is involved in the discussion -- and not just you talking to yourself -- then the others are playing and making decisions.
Another trick is to have your character think "out loud" before you actually do anything that could be considered by them as "crazy," like just spilling the beans on what you were doing somewhere. "Hmm, I think Bob is just about ready to pop this noble in the nose for talking so much," and then give them some time for their characters to step in and control the situation.
A slight variation is to describe your character's demeanor along with what it means: The innkeeper has been prattling on about something, and you say "OK, it's pretty obvious to everyone now that Bob is really antsy for action." Then hopefully the other characters can speed up the innkeeper and get him to the point, or something else. In either case, nobody is surprised so they are probably less likely to be upset with you and think it as more of the character.
You can also ask the DMs or players questions to get more information about a situation. "Does that left tunnel seem any different than the right one?" "Is the ogre really mad-looking?" "Hey Jim, maybe if you make an Arcana check you'll figure something out?" More information might lead to more obvious choices for the other players to find. Sometimes a DM just doesn't give enough (or the right) information for players to make an informed choice, or they don't think of the right ways to "ask."
And as possibly a last resort measure, when the group is presented with some kind of choice, just excuse yourself from the room. "OK, while you guys figure out what we're going to do, I need to go to the bathroom" or "Go on without me, I'll be right back." With you physically not there, they should at least give serious thought to what's happening and if you're (un)lucky they will have stumbled on some action themselves. You could just sort of throw up your hands and say "Well, I have no idea what to do" but they likely wouldn't believe you at this point.
Of course, it is possible the rest of the players in your group are the passive kind, and otherwise actually do want to be led by the nose into the adventure. They might actually be glad that you're moving things along. However the odds are probably against more than one or two players like that in a group.
As an exercise I would suggest your looking at the players as an "observer" to see what parts of the game they like best. DMs usually try to get a read on what parts the players like, by seeing when they generally "come alive." Some players get really involved in the fighting, some in the roleplaying, some just want to level the heck up and so on. Usually all players exhibit some of or all behaviors over time, but stick more closely with one or two.
It's possible the other players get more enjoyment out of being in situations rather than finding the situations. However, I would ask them a couple of times (especially the DM) whether you are really too pushy, and explain you are serious in asking and don't want to be acting that way if they are not happy.
When I read you right you always want action. Talk with a dragon? Be pushy to provoke some action. Face an enemy army? Charge right into it for some action. Maybe the other players want to be diplomatically with the dragon? Mybe they want to be sneaky and bypass the huge wall of minions to get to the enemy leader?
Or maybe I am wrong and they don't have a problem with you dragging them with you.
If we take the stereotypical adventuring party, you (your character?) sound like being the strong barbarian drunkard who tends to solve everything with violence and is easily manipulated by others. If that is the role of your current character this is more or less fine. If all your characters are like that you should overthink your game style.
I'm a pretty active player whenever I do get the opportunity to not dm, but I always wait a few seconds before saying my piece in case anyone else wants to chime in first. I'd say icly ask the other pcs how they feel about your bold behavior as that's the biggest issue I could see...being an active player is one thing, but being the guy who's yelling at dragons and ******* in the BBEG's cereal is another.
I would gladly have a player like you at my table any day. Fortunately I already have a couple, and the more the merrier. The fun increases exponentially as you have more players who take initiative, and engage the world presented for them.
The best place fo the player who likes to be the center of attention is in the DM chair. Seriously.
Not really. Chances are great that you will end up with lots of DMPCs.
Not really. Chances are great that you will end up with lots of DMPCs.
I guess sometimes. It depends on whether one's craving for attention can be fulfilled merely with 'everyone is paying attention to what I say and do' or if one has to take it that extra, annoying, step.
I think I put a lot of myself into my character. While I'm roleplaying, I'm really roleplaying myself as my character. I just take out the pieces that aren't the me I'm pretending to be at the time, it just so happens that when I made this character (a wizard) I didn't take out the part of my personality that enjoys taking action. I have other characters that I play that aren't so balls-to-the-walls, which usually are some other partial aspects of my personality. That's how I roleplay; I quater off parts of my fully-developed human personality to make an effigy of a human, a micro-chasm that is life-like, though incomplete.
We've got several passive players in our group. They're very familiar with the rules, but they're much more comfortable in combat. When the NPC comes up to them and asks them for the Orb of MacGuffin we pulled from the dungeon last session I always do two things; hesitate and take moment to see if the rest of the party has something to say, talk OOC for a few seconds, usually about who actually is holding the item, and then without fail they wait for met to start talking. It may because they don't enjoy it, and know I do, so they're allowing it. Sometimes, at critical moments, I even walk away from the table to make sure somebody else makes a decision. I never just say "somebody has to make a decision so it must have to be me."
Still, there's two other extroverted players (who I get famously with) who will get into the verbal fray with me. All three of us can be subtle and tactful. I can share the limelight with him or her pretty well, but the moment the NPC begins stone-walling us and giving us vague 'non-answers' I change tactics, without fail, and that usually leaves the other two players sitting there looking at me and saying to themselves "I wasn't finished being talked down by this troll yet" while I'm making demands and burning bridges.
When we get into town I'm usually passing out money and food and teaching bards songs about our adventurers. My character is very much an attention seeker. I think my fellow players take that portion of my character's personality as what it is; mostly comic relief and usually a device for the DM to get us into trouble. I don't think they mind what my character does on his 'down time' or when nothing is on the line.
I guess what works for some might not work for others. I think for the most part I'm a good fit for the group; though it does make me nervous that I'm being disruptive.
Most of the groups I've played with have one player who tends to be the instigator - often it's me, which comes as a shock to anyone who's dealt with me outside of a game. Since you're concious of it, just make sure you're giving other characters a chance to 'do their thing' and you'll be fine. It's not necessarily a bad trait. As long as everybody's having fun you're fine.
LOL -- I actually used to be very meek before I began roleplaying.
The thing is, I know from GMing that my players are frustratingly passive when left to their own devices. Sure, our games are still fun, but they're basically railroaded by default simply because my players wait for a hook to bite them before proceeding with the story. As a GM, I wish I had an instigator.
As a player, I try to be what I know my gaming group lacks. no problem there, I'm the talkiest in real life too. I do have the unique perspective of not only being the usual GM and knowing what's needed, but also playing with my fiancee... she does not hold back on the critique. So if you are as close to me as you sound in your play style, here's what she tells me, as best as I can quote:
"You're good as party leader, and fun to play with. Just be careful, sometimes you can be a little.... too much. Especially after a lot of caffeine."
I'm in the same situation, but with some perspective. Normally I GM; however, when I play, my situation is so similar to yours that I could practically have written that first post.
The thing is, I know from GMing that my players are frustratingly passive when left to their own devices. Sure, our games are still fun, but they're basically railroaded by default simply because my players wait for a hook to bite them before proceeding with the story. As a GM, I wish I had an instigator.
As a player, I try to be what I know my gaming group lacks. no problem there, I'm the talkiest in real life too. I do have the unique perspective of not only being the usual GM and knowing what's needed, but also playing with my fiancee... she does not hold back on the critique. So if you are as close to me as you sound in your play style, here's what she tells me, as best as I can quote:
"You're good as party leader, and fun to play with. Just be careful, sometimes you can be a little.... too much. Especially after a lot of caffeine."
Yeah, this is me all over. I received criticism to this effect, so as an experiment and an attempt to make a point i tried just not making major decisions or saying much of anything for a few sessions, and after about 4 weeks of our characters hanging around in a city with nothing really happening, no plot advancement, and the overall fun level of the game dropping into the toilet for me, one of the other players actually called me on it and asked why id gotten so passive. I explained to her that since everyone complained about me hogging the spotlight even though they themselves never did anything adventurous, i decided to spend a few weeks doing nothing big and letting them get spotlight time because i hated detsroying everyone elses fun.
Well, the issue was that they enjoyed that kind of game. It wasn't the D&D i thought i was signing on for, but fortunately the players wanted me around badly enough to adjust their style of game more to accomodate what i wanted. There was a lot less grousing when in-character i decided to ACT instead of spending hours of real time talking and planning. They began to understand that i like epic battles, rooftop chases, intense interrogations and hostile negotiations. It was even better when they started taking advantage of it and playing off it; one player even retooled her character to be the good cop to my bad cop. And all was fun again.
So the moral of this lengthy rambling tale: Maybe instead of you changing for them, they could man (or woman) up a bit and take a more active role in moving the game along and making sure everyone has truckloads of fun. Ask them to try playing YOUR way ever so often instead of always making you feel like a pushy jerk.
-SvD
That is better than some folks I know.
You know what im talking about, the annoying over the top ones that dont know there irritating and deny it?
The only advice I'd give at this point is that when they are making a plan/ trying to be subtle, try not to ruin their plans with your own, um, enthusiasm. Look for ways to be your extroverted self while still working with the group (maybe they need a diversion for their plan to work).
That, and you can always use your natural inclinations as blackmail.
"Ok guys - lets do something. I'll be back in a few minutes and if you haven't come up with some kinda plan by then we're gonna have to do this my way."
Carl
Chances are if they get annoyed with you ending a conversation prematurely, it's because they wanted to keep talking. If everyone is sort of sitting around with nothing to say, then you can go cause trouble or call the NPC out. Sometimes follow another guy's lead though.
Someone else posted a sentiment I agree with. What you do is only bad if your actions habitually dictate how the game moves forward. If encounters that have the chance of either words OR actions end with bloodshed because you get bored then thats bad.
We can't really know what your games are like. The only reason I think something may be wrong is that you are concerned about it. Anyhoo, the only thing left I can suggest is to, as subtle as you can to avoid tipping off your group, change up your tactics and observe how they act. If they have more fun then take note. Otherwise, I guess you're doing no wrong.
My character has been loud, active, and demanding, but he's never been stupid. I think there's a type of roleplayer that feels he must 'choose the correct response' like you would in an RPG like Baldur's Gate -- That's not roleplaying to me! You don't get the chance to reload if you clicked the wrong text option, you just say whatever your character would say.
We run into a lot of NPC characters who'll tell us they know something important, but when prompted to ask they'll either give us purposefully vague answers and look at us knowingly, like they're saying "that explains it all" when really it just leads to more questions. Instead of saying "okay, that's another useless answer, let's go find the next useless answer," I push the DM and threaten to affect the game world by unnerving it a little bit. When there's an NPC who is obviously using us, telling us a lie, or not giving us what we need to know; They're my enemy. I make the NPC character feel the need to convince ME to help HIM instead of what my party members would like to do and roll diplomacy checks and beg and grovel and put themselves exactly where the NPC wants them. I may sometimes get us into immediate danger, but at least I don't lead the party into traps and double-dealings. There have been multiple times in which I've said to obviously powerful wizards, demi-gods, and dragons; "Listen, buddy, you don't need me to hate you, because I'll fight you tooth and claw. I'll be your worst enemy, and you'll be ruined for it. If you're not going to be forward then I will; I'll smash your castles, I'll arm your surfs, I'll steal your gold, and I'll take your women. While I may not be able to destroy you, nonetheless you'll regret my existance. I'm a foe you can't afford to have because I'm irrational, entertained by violence, completely without any sense of fear or self, and I work for free. Trust me when I say this; I'm more trouble than I'm worth."
(At that point the other players usually distance themselves from me.)
If it never really gets you in trouble, maybe everyone's just having fun after all.
The problem is that the others just don't seem to be much of a bunch of roleplayers, or they do things very differently from how you would do them. The friends I play with do things differently from how I would do those things as well, and often seem to forget basic stuff as well ("Are you sure you are going to walk around town with a rifle in plain sight?").
A thing to try out might be to not be in a player's seat the next session: try to take the DM's seat for a single session before going back to being a player, and see how they handle themselves then. Or, if you are not comfortable DMing or if your DM is awesome as is, wait with jumping in the game, say that your character is away for a bit and watch how things unfold before you. That may be hard, considering you like to take action, though, but the only other thing I can come up with is staying away for that one session, a thing that may not be preferable, though the other player's reactions to things may be wildly different from when you are there.
There have been multiple times in which I've said to obviously powerful wizards, demi-gods, and dragons; "Listen, buddy, you don't need me to hate you, because I'll fight you tooth and claw. I'll be your worst enemy, and you'll be ruined for it. If you're not going to be forward then I will; I'll smash your castles, I'll arm your surfs, I'll steal your gold, and I'll take your women. While I may not be able to destroy you, nonetheless you'll regret my existance. I'm a foe you can't afford to have because I'm irrational, entertained by violence, completely without any sense of fear or self, and I work for free. Trust me when I say this; I'm more trouble than I'm worth."
(At that point the other players usually distance themselves from me.)
Are you prepared for one of them to eventually get annoyed enough to just kill you. Or are you trusting (metagaming) the DM to never use the nuclear option?
Because if I were your DM, you would eventually pay the price - powerful "wizards, demi-gods and dragons" aren't known for their tolerance - especially their tolerance of those who are "more trouble than they are worth" and yes, there are beings in the world more powerful than the PCs.
Carl
Are you prepared for one of them to eventually get annoyed enough to just kill you. Or are you trusting (metagaming) the DM to never use the nuclear option?
Because if I were your DM, you would eventually pay the price - powerful "wizards, demi-gods and dragons" aren't known for their tolerance - especially their tolerance of those who are "more trouble than they are worth" and yes, there are beings in the world more powerful than the PCs.
Carl
I am somewhat counting on the DM to not flat out DM-smite a player, yes. There have been times when the BBEG or whoever says "fine, kill him," and we've got to escape. A DM who uses the 'nuclear' option is certainly abusing his power, if what you mean is a 'instant kill' type of attack from the baddie. If you have ever done this as a DM you might be a bigger nacissist than I am.
yeah there are a lot of NPCs that this would work on. The ones that it didn't work on would off your PC in a heartbeat.
Same thing; if the only way you can avoid being killed by an NPC is to bow down to his demands then you're really bottle-necking the players. While it is metagaming to know that your DM wouldn't do this, it doesn't make it bad. My character is fearless, and I can play him fearlessly because I know the DM is allowing me certain cofidences. It allows me to roleplay a character who is very much selflessly dedicated to his quest, friends, and glory. The entire point of this game is to place your personality proxies, effigies, or constructs into danger, and subsequently get them out of it again.
I look at having NPC characters that are only meant to be dealt with in one specific way as being amaturish. A DM who places an NPC that will simply be able to instantly pwn a player or even to powerful to reasonably escape from is a *bad* DM. I'm somewhat holding the DM hostage, but there have been times when my social tactics have caused tremendous set-backs for us, so I feel that while the DM hasn't gone 'nuclear' he has realistically reacted to my chosen path. I'm prepared to make enemies where we could've had allies. The reason why is that the way I see it, if the NPC isn't rational and willing to explain his side of a situation so that everyone involved can make informed choices then they're usually not somebody I want to work with or for anyways. I'll start out reasonable, willing to talk and explore options, and usually trusting (which is where some of the trouble comes in) of the NPC, but if he or she won't return the favor then I treat them like they treated our party; like an enemy. I've never accepted an NPC who says "There are things you don't understand," as an excuse not to be honest.
Whether what I do is smart or not isn't what I'm asking; I'm asking if it's unreasonable to make other players deal with my choices, and whether or not I have been giving them opportunity make choices of their own. What do you think?
Next time I play with this group I'm going to be a little more passive. Since I've realized that I may be black-mailing the other party members and rail-roading them into what I want to do, I've become a lot less vocal. Also my DM and I even spoke at length last game about giving me fewer opportunities to go into a 'me-moment' and more opportunities to give the other players more room to shine.
Also note, I play in another game with another group, where there is a similar type of player. I play a stoic and dedicated Jedi character, and I very rarely 'conclude' a conversation and I don't take decisive actions. I do, however, place vetos on certain actions. One of the other players is a bad combination of pushy and cheesy; and I've just got to say 'no' to most of his ideas. Is this basically the same thing?
I am somewhat counting on the DM to not flat out DM-smite a player, yes. There have been times when the BBEG or whoever says "fine, kill him," and we've got to escape. A DM who uses the 'nuclear' option is certainly abusing his power, if what you mean is a 'instant kill' type of attack from the baddie. If you have ever done this as a DM you might be a bigger nacissist than I am.
I disagree.
If a character walks up to a significantly more powerful and non-good NPC and acts in the way you are describing - being killed outright is and should be an option for the DM. If the creature has the power, why wouldn't he use it?
(More trouble than you are worth? Fine. Disintigrate. Ok, no more trouble. Guards! Sweep that up!)
The nuclear option is only DM abuse if the DM is setting up the situation to trip you up or tricks you into it (or gives the creature inappropriate abilities to accomplish it).
Rather, you are abusing the situation by applying the metagame information that the DM will not want to kill you. Your character would have no such protection.
Same thing; if the only way you can avoid being killed by an NPC is to bow down to his demands then you're really bottle-necking the players.
Total and absolute BS (in my opinion, of course).
That is wrong on so many levels I hardly know where to start.
But I'll start with this: The world and NPCs ought to be run in a way that makes sense given their personalities and abilities. If the players are stupid enough to be insulting and offensive to those who are more powerful than they are, there ought to be consequences. Just because you are PCs, that does not mean that the universe revolves around you and you have the right to do whatever you want or say whatever you want and one of the realities of life (and should be one of the realities within the game) is that one must occasionally defer to those more powerful.
While it is metagaming to know that your DM wouldn't do this, it doesn't make it bad. My character is fearless, and I can play him fearlessly because I know the DM is allowing me certain cofidences. It allows me to roleplay a character who is very much selflessly dedicated to his quest, friends, and glory. The entire point of this game is to place your personality proxies, effigies, or constructs into danger, and subsequently get them out of it again.
In short - you can use your metagame knowledge to act in ways that your character could never do because you know that your character is safe from the consquences. This is no different from a player who attacks creatures much more powerful than himself because he knows that if the fight goes badly the DM won't kill him and will let him escape.
I look at having NPC characters that are only meant to be dealt with in one specific way as being amaturish.
As opposed to NPCs that have unrealistic reactions to the players actions?
A DM who places an NPC that will simply be able to instantly pwn a player or even to powerful to reasonably escape from is a *bad* DM.
Which is a sign of a 'bad DM'? Having NPCs that are more powerful than the players? Having those NPCs use their powers when the players choose, to their own free will, to draw the NPCs ire?
What is being discussed is not some form of DM railroading. It is having the world react in a logical and appropriate manner to the players actions.
It's akin to a player jumping off of a 100' cliff and saying "well, only a bad DM would limit how I can solve the problem of getting down so the fall can't kill me."
There are innumerable ways of dealing with every NPC. But that doesn't mean that every possible way of dealing with them ought to work and in the examples being discussed the approachs you are describing ought not to work - at least not all the time.
That said, most NPCs wouldn't go to "kill him" first. But it wouldn't take much to push them over that line if you continued to ignore the warning signs. (Besides, that's what the Geas spell is for).
The reason why is that the way I see it, if the NPC isn't rational and willing to explain his side of a situation so that everyone involved can make informed choices then they're usually not somebody I want to work with or for anyways. I'll start out reasonable, willing to talk and explore options, and usually trusting (which is where some of the trouble comes in) of the NPC, but if he or she won't return the favor then I treat them like they treated our party; like an enemy. I've never accepted an NPC who says "There are things you don't understand," as an excuse not to be honest.
And if you treat them like an enemy - why shouldn't they treat you like an enemy. And how do you treat enemies who have declared an intent to cause you future problems?
Whether what I do is smart or not isn't what I'm asking; I'm asking if it's unreasonable to make other players deal with my choices, and whether or not I have been giving them opportunity make choices of their own. What do you think?
That brings us back to our initial question. I suspect the one who called your actions 'stupid' is probably thinking along the same lines as I am and wondering when the hammer is going to fall and hoping it doesn't take him out along with you. They all probably cringe a bit when they see you start negotiating (although, assuming you give them the chance, not enough to become proactive about it).
Next time I play with this group I'm going to be a little more passive. Since I've realized that I may be black-mailing the other party members and rail-roading them into what I want to do, I've become a lot less vocal. Also my DM and I even spoke at length last game about giving me fewer opportunities to go into a 'me-moment' and more opportunities to give the other players more room to shine.
Sounds like an excellent approach. It will be interesting to see how the others react to this change.
Also note, I play in another game with another group, where there is a similar type of player. I play a stoic and dedicated Jedi character, and I very rarely 'conclude' a conversation and I don't take decisive actions. I do, however, place vetos on certain actions. One of the other players is a bad combination of pushy and cheesy; and I've just got to say 'no' to most of his ideas. Is this basically the same thing?
You have a double in the other group?
Carl
Having at least one instigator is necessary- without one, the players are simply led about by the DM. Maybe some of you like that sort of thing, but I prefer some amount of feedback from my players.
Also, if the instigators start doing stupid things that get the party in trouble, the rest of the players will likely start leading the plot on their own- they will start speaking up in front of the dragon before they find themselves imprisoned, or discuss a plan before charging at the enemy horde.
It can be annoying when the instigators start to hog the spotlight- but if everyone's mature about it, everyone can get their share of attention.
Regardless, I think it's a small sacrifice to make for having the plot actually go somewhere.
TS
I've personally had this problem in my game. Your first message in a mirror reflection of a player I have. He always makes super buff, ballsy characters. His steals the spot light constantly and my other players have had enough. They message me telling me to kill his character or kick him out of the game. This is when it sucks to be a DM, because no DM wants to be in that situation.
On the other hand, I have seen games where NOTHING would ever get done without someone instigating some of the action, for good or ill. It sounds like your party falls in that category - - reacting to situations they are presented, but never seeking any information or RP opportunities of their own. Bottom line, without seeing you in action, it would be hard to judge if your are over the top, or are just playing a larger-than-life character to the hilt, but it wouldn't hurt to talk with the other players in your group. If they have no problem (of think the gameplay makes up for the annoyance) then more power to you.
Besides, any party that lets the known instigator act as their spokesperson probably deserves any trouble they get.
The reason you might lie to someone is because no one has a Television or the internet in a D&D setting (this is prone to exceptions). As such, while the hobgoblin may have been a disciple of the dragon you intended to find and the dragon probably warned its minions about you, your ability to pretend you're not the party they're looking for still stands.
On another part of that, it seems your friends aren't great at the lying aspect of lying. The way to win the best of both worlds is to take some sort of guise that allows you to ask questions to the hobgoblin without revealing too much. And if you're lying about why you're there, you keep it general so they can't really pin you for anything you have mis-spoken of.
Now, center-of-attentionness. I had a PC in an old group who was very much the center-of-attention. His forceful personality pushed him towards being knight of a realm and a high-ranking one at that, and a friend of the King and a wise advisor on war and diplomatic strategy. Well, firstly, he was well aware how little everyone else chose to take some time in the sun. He argued that he was trying to get everyone to take leadership whenever possible but that they refused (which I can agree to). And if he wasn't in the group, I can see that the group would either crumple in on itself like a whithering star or the PCs would learn something. Tough to tell, though.
Sounds like you've seen what happens when you don't take the lead; everyone does things without regards to personal agendas or personality. That in mind, just keep pushing them to make their time in the spotlight worthwhile. Give 'em room, and make it a point that you're only being audacious because no one else is. Maybe strike deals that you'll temporarily "behave" if you can get each PC to say a single thing to an enemy or do a less-than-cautious action.
Sounds like you've seen what happens when you don't take the lead; everyone does things without regards to personal agendas or personality. That in mind, just keep pushing them to make their time in the spotlight worthwhile. Give 'em room, and make it a point that you're only being audacious because no one else is. Maybe strike deals that you'll temporarily "behave" if you can get each PC to say a single thing to an enemy or do a less-than-cautious action.
Last game, I tried to make a deal with the party; take some action on your own and I won't have to go super-nova and get things done. Well, it didn't happen.
Let me explain it to you like this; I'm the wizard, and I had to cross the heavily trapped fey-wild grotto to get the lich's phylactery myself, because the party was too cautious to take a chance. Even the highly perceptive rogue/scout wouldn't risk it. She chose to hide in the woods and wait for the ambush.
There was an ambush, btw.
Be an equal opportunity instigator. Don't just get the party in trouble, or just lead the group around by the nose. J was very cautious to occasionally be helpful, occasionally brilliant, and occasionally way stupid. Thus, for every time he got the party into big trouble, there was another time when the day was saved due to his action.
Be true to yourself. J was always careful about taking the actions that made sense for his character, and not for the group, or for him as a player. He might KNOW that doing something was going to hose his character, but if it was what the character would do, that was what he would do. The instigation stemmed from playing a character, in J's case, who was curious, overconfident, and cheerful. If you are going to be an instigator, make sure that you create someone who would logically be the instigator.
Pick a sidekick. J was always looking for ways to instigate action for someone else. This was a way for him to push the story forward, while putting someone else in the stoplight. If the guards had a mystery, J would point out that our wizards could probably cast a spell to help. If the villagers had injured people, J would lead them to our cleric. This way, J could be the instigator, while someone else actually got the attention.
Have your own interests. J also created a character who had his own personal idiosyncrasies and obsessions, like fishing, and drinking. If there was downtime, he might focus on these "solo" pursuits, forcing someone else to drive the action, since his character was emphatically "busy".
Be a nice guy. J is one of the most likable people I know. Despite the fact that we all know he wants to be the center of attention, he can laugh at himself, he always helps out in the game, is polite and generous, and pays attention to what everyone else does. Even if you are a spotlight hog, you can play up your positive qualities to help balance it.
Be an equal opportunity instigator. Don't just get the party in trouble, or just lead the group around by the nose. J was very cautious to occasionally be helpful, occasionally brilliant, and occasionally way stupid. Thus, for every time he got the party into big trouble, there was another time when the day was saved due to his action.
I've saved the group quite a few times, as well. There was one instance, in particular, that I disguised myself as a drow and the rest of the party as my slaves and walked straight into a drow stronghold. Once inside, I seduced the matron's daughter and convinced her to help us. I got voted MVP for a month straight.
Be true to yourself. J was always careful about taking the actions that made sense for his character, and not for the group, or for him as a player. He might KNOW that doing something was going to hose his character, but if it was what the character would do, that was what he would do. The instigation stemmed from playing a character, in J's case, who was curious, overconfident, and cheerful. If you are going to be an instigator, make sure that you create someone who would logically be the instigator.
My character is a slightly nihilistic hedonist from the feywild, where all the wonderful sensations he felt quickly bore him, and he asked himself of a larger world with sensations beyond lust and pleasure. My Eladrin Wizard truly enjoys the taste of failure, misery, and stupidity; they're sensations utterly new to him. So, he's really got all the reason in the world to press the proverbial big red button.
Pick a sidekick. J was always looking for ways to instigate action for someone else. This was a way for him to push the story forward, while putting someone else in the stoplight. If the guards had a mystery, J would point out that our wizards could probably cast a spell to help. If the villagers had injured people, J would lead them to our cleric. This way, J could be the instigator, while someone else actually got the attention.
While I wouldn't consider her a sidekick, Another PC is an Eladrin as well; an exile. I was a brass hat in the feywild, and after a great deal of roleplaying, my character gave her a big hug and shouted, "we'll save you from yourself or die cryin'."
She responded, "don't you mean 'die trying?'"
"Well that goes without saying, dun'it?" I said.
Since then, it's been revealed she's destined for godhood, and my character gives her the big thumbs up everytime she takes a tiny step closer to divinity. Sometimes, when we face off against detractors, I'll stun a character with a spell and drag his corpse over to her feet, sit on his back, and lift his head up to look at her from the ground, then ask, "Speak civil, pawn, for heaven will wait for you as hostile as hell should you make an enemy today."
Another character was a slave we freed, and because I was a pretty much the front-man who actually payed for him (even though it was the party's doing), he's a dedicated slave who knows nothing else other than dedication to his owner. Sometimes, at a crossroads, he's standing silent, spear in hand, and I turn to ask him, "What do you think, trusted friend." This; unfortunately, usually derails us as he freaks out and whines and tells us he doesn't know what to say.
There's a vampire in our party, and we work together like pees in a pod. There have been times we've tied ourselves together and descended into the darkest most evil pits of enemies unknown and come out hugging like frightened rabbits, albeit living rabbits. Anytime there's something to be done what we ought not do, I always hesitate to volunteer her, but she comes just the same, despite her grudging demeanor.
I frequently force role playing, it's just that sometimes, like when we're facing a mind-flayer who could rightfully pwn us, and I threaten him because he's not showing enough respect to the godling, that can sometimes push it in directions the party might not want to go. I don't always do it, but often enough that I've got a reputation for it.
Have your own interests. J also created a character who had his own personal idiosyncrasies and obsessions, like fishing, and drinking. If there was downtime, he might focus on these "solo" pursuits, forcing someone else to drive the action, since his character was emphatically "busy".
Unfortunately, the only thing my character cares about is his new-found friends in the party. After leaving the feywild in search of new sensations, he wandered pointlessly for years, accomplishing almost everything. It was only after, somewhat recklessly, joining the party without any forethought or reason, that he began to find something in life that's new. Even in his off time, my character hangs around with the party and discuss how much danger they're facing. Maybe I'll give him a pretend girlfriend next-time we're in town.
Be a nice guy. J is one of the most likable people I know. Despite the fact that we all know he wants to be the center of attention, he can laugh at himself, he always helps out in the game, is polite and generous, and pays attention to what everyone else does. Even if you are a spotlight hog, you can play up your positive qualities to help balance it.
I like to think I'm likeable!
Tonight we fought a shadow-dragon thing. It ate the MacGuffin object we were protecting. The thing the whole campaign circled around. We were running away, doing your basic 'complexity 5' skill challenge when the DM made an announcement; we'd failed the skill challenge, and we'd have to keep fighting...Then he spoke these fateful words "unless somebody can slow it down." (Be very quiet, but the DM was actually railroading us! Don't let the other players know!)
Everyone looked at me. It was my time to shine. This dragon had just killed the BBEG and two NPC characters who we all liked! They weren't DMPC characters; they were people we'd rescued and who were willing to die for us! I was mad and I wanted revenge.
I stopped, turned, and faced the dragon. One of the characters, the fellow Eladrin*, turned and called for me to follow. Of course, like a drama-hog I looked back, probably in slow motion, and shook my head no. One of the characters actually had to restrain her as I drew my sword and *charged at the legendary dragon by myself.* There were grapple checks to keep her from running after me; there was an attack roll to forcefully immobilize her; there was dedication!
We didn't run the actual encounter. It was pretty much a certainty that it was going to kill me. The rest of the party escaped, and after seeing the dragon, the new BBEG, fly off into the night sky, then went back to see if I was still alive.
They found my corpse, and cast 'Raise Dead' on me. I was *really* dead. Some of those enemies I made were powerful devils, and they were waiting for first dibs on my soul, and they're not giving it back.
One of the players cried. There was hugging. There was talk of framing character sheets. It was a good character! At least one other player really loved the character. I was touched. I know it was a game of make believe, but another human being and I connected.
What actually happened was that the DM and I spoke yesterday and we agreed my character needed to go away for a little while, but return after a few sessions. So, these next few weeks I'm gonna sit out the game and let the group get along without me, and in the meantime he's going to, ironically, place the recovery of my character's soul as the primary quest to accomplish for the group. If they had any loyalty to the character, they'd do their best, but if not I'll call the character too troublesome to play and roll a new character.
The wife of the DM was the player who's character was so dedicated to mine. The DM is going to place her in a "you've got to spear-head this opperation" situation, and really encourage her to contribute. The player who grabbed her and drug her away was quickly blamed by her for stopping her, and, because he was my 'bodyguard' who was only acting under my 'orders' (all this is just roleplaying, I don't really tell another player what to do so blatently) he feels justified but lost. The character that immobilized her said he felt guilty, and believed that if had turned around and fought they would've been able to rescue my character. I pointed out that this player really had a 'rescue complex.' He almost always does the rescuing. The vampire, who doesn't suffer emotions, repeatedly suggested she eat my body so I'd rise as vampire. The tiefling warlord, who even though the player had been with us from the beggining, was the newest member of the party, and began looting my body. An actual "I'll kill you" fight broke out, and for an hour the game revolved around settling this rather sudden and intense dislike between him and the bodyguard and Eladrin. My character's death did more for getting the characters out of their shells than anything else!
If they recover the character, I'll be reborn as an "arch-wizard," like Gandolf did after coming back from the dead. A thing of legend. Something grand and fearful. That'll be sexy. (I think we settled on the effects of being a legendary wizard being equivalent to the feats "skill focus(imtimidate and arcana)" which I'd retrain my character to qaulify for, but hopefully the party'll be epic by then and I can take the epic destiny 'arch-wizard.')
One of the players cried. There was hugging. There was talk of framing character sheets.
Reading this, I found it to be more than utterly hilarious.
Good times. Good luck on your Triumphant return.
My character's death did more for getting the characters out of their shells than anything else!
Priceless!
TS
If you've been with the group for a while, then they've made their feelings clear - they're happy with following, and you da man.
I occasionally take on that role - two of the people I play with are very much follower-types who actively resist being pushed into leader roles, immediately establishing OOC democracy if forced by circumstance. Another likes to do his own thing, but falls in line when the plot is concerned - another does his own thing regardless (he likes playing minotaur barbarians and has a strong tendency to react to irritation with homicide). My last frequent companion also tends towards the leader role, but one or the other of us is almost always DMing, so there's no problem between us (although he DOES attract player complaints, we're not the silent grudge type - when he gets pushy, they let him know in character. Me, too, if I'm out of line - even the passive followers.)
Hope this helps. Happy gaming. :D
Another trick is to have your character think "out loud" before you actually do anything that could be considered by them as "crazy," like just spilling the beans on what you were doing somewhere. "Hmm, I think Bob is just about ready to pop this noble in the nose for talking so much," and then give them some time for their characters to step in and control the situation.
A slight variation is to describe your character's demeanor along with what it means: The innkeeper has been prattling on about something, and you say "OK, it's pretty obvious to everyone now that Bob is really antsy for action." Then hopefully the other characters can speed up the innkeeper and get him to the point, or something else. In either case, nobody is surprised so they are probably less likely to be upset with you and think it as more of the character.
This is very good advice.
You also might want to tip the DM off that you're going to start doing this. That way, when you say that Bob looks like he's about to pop the noble int he nose for talking so much, the DM knows that what you really want is for the other characters to step in, mediate, and talk Bob down. Your goal isn't to actually pop the noble in the nose, unless no one steps up to the plate. That way the DM can nudge the situation in the right direction.
Its a little different way of playing the game than most people are used to, but its rewarding.
I think during my gaming hiatus I'll take up the mantle of DM again. I'll probably force my friends to try "Feng Shui" which is the only game that actually encourages the players to make bad decisions just because it looks cool.
This is very good advice.
You also might want to tip the DM off that you're going to start doing this. That way, when you say that Bob looks like he's about to pop the noble int he nose for talking so much, the DM knows that what you really want is for the other characters to step in, mediate, and talk Bob down. Your goal isn't to actually pop the noble in the nose, unless no one steps up to the plate. That way the DM can nudge the situation in the right direction.
Its a little different way of playing the game than most people are used to, but its rewarding.
We make pretty good use of that. When I'm wearing long sleeves I always begin rolling them up like a sailor, which is the que for the more laid back characters to do something to cool off the situation.
Another player, who always seems to "lose his sword," often begins to look around the table for something in the middle of a conversation, and the players ask him "what're you looking for?" He replies, "My sword." We all know he's about to garrate some poor schmuck.