So right off the bat Im put off becuase to me the background stories make me want to actually keep my character alive. With out them not only do I not care about my character but I dont care about the other peoples character becuase they are simply chess pieces on a board.
As for the real problem it goes like this we have no control over are characters, at all. We dont know when we level or how much exp we earned after the session. We arent allowed to take the character sheets home and guess what when we do level we dont get to pick our new spells,skills, or feats. Its all controled by the GM and the GM dose this becuase we might try and optimize are characters.
This to me is tottal bs and now Im stuck playing a character I have no interest in playing, with a game that has no backstory or even a simple reason for why we are all here. Heck the only reason Im still playing is in fear of not finding a group with space and if I leave this group its done becuase we are skeleton group (4 players)
So any suggestions on how to take back control of my pc? Or should I just leave in hopes of finding a new game?
Leave - I would anyway. A game like that really takes the fun out of it for me.
Yea I think I'll just grind my teeth and play in one more session just to give em the heads up.
From how you've written it, this looks like a status quo that you will have little chance to influence.
If the other players are cool with the DM controlling what are usually player choices, then that's up to them.
I'd leave.
Definitely leave. If the DM is picking your character's advancements, he doesn't want players. He wants to play with himself.
I don't know all the background, but it's possible that the DM does have a reason (even a poor one) for this behavior. Not to defend the guy, but one thing, the DM keeping character sheets, is very common in the groups I play in/DM since it keeps everything in one spot and sheets are available in case someone has to miss a session and needs a proxy.
Yes, leave.
From how you've written it, this looks like a status quo that you will have little chance to influence.
If the other players are cool with the DM controlling what are usually player choices, then that's up to them.
I'd leave.
Yea I've discussed this with the other players and they like the situation as is becuase they havent played for very long. They find its better this way becuase they dont have the hassle of keeping up with the pc's and can just sit down and play.
Currently I think I've found a new group
Leave, posthaste. Get away from this DM while you still enjoy the game.
Yea, I'd probably end up leaving too, but you might want to explain why you are leaving to the DM. In a calm tone, explain what you dislike about the game and why you dislike it. If there is anything that you do enjoy about the game, be sure to mention that as well.
I don't know all the background, but it's possible that the DM does have a reason (even a poor one) for this behavior. Not to defend the guy, but one thing, the DM keeping character sheets, is very common in the groups I play in/DM since it keeps everything in one spot and sheets are available in case someone has to miss a session and needs a proxy.
Yea the next session will be my last and I'll be telling him why it is. Of course I'll tell him in a calm manner and I will feel a little bad as me leaving will simply kill the game for the other people. Unless they are able to find another person for the next session. They have been trying to find more players but when they interview them the people leave becuase they have no control over what they want to play.
As much as I hate to recommend such extreme options—especially since you had indicated that finding a group is not exactly easy—the DM apparently does not need you to play his statblock (based on your description of things, calling it a "character" seems to be too generous) for him. I have a sneaking suspicion that the sequence of events ("story") has the Amtrak Seal of Approval, too...
Leave, posthaste. Get away from this DM while you still enjoy the game.
Yea, I still love the game I've been playing it for almost 10 years now. In that time I've been in great campaigns and horrible ones. Tho within those 10 years I have to say this is prolly the wrost one I've been in.
Yes I to believe that Amtrak had a great deal of imput in this game. I tried to kill my pc for a clean break but the cleric in the group was just to good of a healer.
After a while, I confronted him about it and he told me that he has had players in the past that metagamed a lot and he got really frustratied by it. So he decided to rule that out by controling how we leveled up.
I would talk to your DM and see if he has had a bad experiance like this as well. Maybe you can convince him that you and your teammates are resposable and won't screw him over. If you have no luck there then move on to the next group.
Hope this helps
Alright so I finally get in a game after months of searching for a group with open space. I wasnt to sure as to what class I wanted to play and I got told they need a tank. I was fine with that so I picked out 1st level spells,skills, and feats. I asked if I could write up a backstory and was told that I could but it wouldnt be read and it would have bearing on the game.
So right off the bat Im put off becuase to me the background stories make me want to actually keep my character alive. With out them not only do I not care about my character but I dont care about the other peoples character becuase they are simply chess pieces on a board.
As for the real problem it goes like this we have no control over are characters, at all. We dont know when we level or how much exp we earned after the session. We arent allowed to take the character sheets home and guess what when we do level we dont get to pick our new spells,skills, or feats. Its all controled by the GM and the GM dose this becuase we might try and optimize are characters.
This to me is tottal bs and now Im stuck playing a character I have no interest in playing, with a game that has no backstory or even a simple reason for why we are all here. Heck the only reason Im still playing is in fear of not finding a group with space and if I leave this group its done becuase we are skeleton group (4 players)
So any suggestions on how to take back control of my pc? Or should I just leave in hopes of finding a new game?
In regards to your backstory, they only told you that your character's backstory would not be read out loud for everyone. That does NOT mean that you could not write up a backstory or that it could not influence your character. Also, what does it matter whether or not you know someone else's backstory? If another character's backstory is not read out loud how do you know whether or not there is a backstory? It seems to me that because you are told that backstories are not important that you have prejudged the players and their characters and assumed that there is no personality to the characters. Characters do not require a backstory to seem real and/or believable.
In regards to the DM controlling your characters, you need to ask yourself one simple question. Do you dread going to the session more than you look forward to going to the session? In other words, weigh whether or not you can enjoy playing in such a game. If not, then leave the group. I personally feel that it is better to not play in game that I do not enjoy. Personally, I would never let a DM hold my character sheet against my will.
Out of curiosity, how old is your DM and how long has he been playing?
You're trapped in a game style I call "Dungeons and Dragons: Tactics". Like the Final Fantasy game of similar nomenclature, the plotline is there, but optional, and the game focuses mostly on the direct use of skills, abilities, and combat from the character sheet and battle grid. This is a gamestyle that I fear will grow by leaps and bounds due to 4e because some of its rules encourage the behavior, or at the very least fail to discourage it.
FASA developed a game that was perfect for this playstyle (Battletech), but the massive hole in the fun left by a lack of RP led to the creation of MechWarrior, a BattleTech addon that introduced PCs to the game instead of simply tactical units on an abstract storyline.
I have no idea why D&D seems to be progressing in reverse order, but it's a bad move.
I digress. Bail on the adventure; DMs may be hard to find, but bad games are far too easy to end up in .
Tinder, if you like any of those players from the "bad" group, consider checking with the "new" group whether they might want some more players too. If the "bad" group is out of a game, then maybe some of them could move over to another.
I don't recall the OP stating what version he was playing. It doesn't even matter.
Tinder, if you like any of those players from the "bad" group, consider checking with the "new" group whether they might want some more players too. If the "bad" group is out of a game, then maybe some of them could move over to another.
I've been told repeatedly these are the "4e" forums. As such, I figured that if someone's pointing out that something sucks, it must be regarding 4e.
I've been told repeatedly these are the "4e" forums. As such, I figured that if someone's pointing out that something sucks, it must be regarding 4e.
Sorry for butting in but it says up the top of my screen "Dungeons & Dragons" and nothing about 4th, 3.5 or even ad&d. Its for any D&D edition.
My friend, you failed on your sense motive ;)
You're trapped in a game style I call "Dungeons and Dragons: Tactics". Like the Final Fantasy game of similar nomenclature, the plotline is there, but optional, and the game focuses mostly on the direct use of skills, abilities, and combat from the character sheet and battle grid.
If you'll allow me to de-rail the thread for a moment I'd like to point out that that's a terrible example, FFT, or at the very least FFTA and FFTA2, are about matching the proper skills and items together to make unbeatable characters. if you play the game right, you'll only ever need one guy for any given mission.
a better example would be a game that gives players set skills at each level-up. final fantasy tactics adds a bigger element of customization than almost any other game I'm aware of, if not the most.
sorry. carry on.
Sorry for butting in but it says up the top of my screen "Dungeons & Dragons" and nothing about 4th, 3.5 or even ad&d. Its for any D&D edition.
And bad DMs exist in every edition of every game system ever printed. This has nothing to do with what system is being run, it has to do with a control freak DM, something Corvus has epically failed to comprehend.
And bad DMs exist in every edition of every game system ever printed. This has nothing to do with what system is being run, it has to do with a control freak DM, something Corvus has epically failed to comprehend.
Oh, no, I do quite understand the actual problem. I just took the Dirty Fighting feat ;)
.
I experienced the same thing all the time. I wanted to play a fighter. Just fighter, no multiclass or anything fancy. Basic. Simple.
But, the DM (and the rest of the group) is/are big time optimizers. Personally, I hate optimizing. They insisted I take a multiclass level in "ranger" at fifth level because fighters "got nothing" at level 5. It wasn't an issue for me as I was satisfied on getting "stuff" (Abilities/powers/whatever) at higher levels.
So, just to shut them up, I took the level in ranger. But it didn't stop there. The Optimizers insisted I take feat x, and Y and so on.
If the DM wants to bulid a character and have me play it, I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is being told to make a character and not really be part of the process.
Don't get me wrong, suggestions were all to be helpful. But, I had some choices that I wanted to make that in order to keep the peace, I took. That's when I got passive agressive.
That super feat I just HAD to have and the character completly sucks if I don't take it? Yeah, I went out of my way to NOT use it at all. Ever.
They never even noticed.
This situation continued on to our 4e game where I intentionally selected powers for my Warlock outside his pact. Why? I liked fire bolt. I'm not required to take only star pact powers, and Fire bolt hits the target and anyone around them. Great for what I did. (I hang back and fire from a safe distance.) The optimizer in my group insisted I take the star pact power for that level rather than the fire bolt. This one time I didn't object and took the power change only because I thought to myself "How many warlocks do I ever plan to play?" I want to check out what all the powers do.
Which means when we level up, he will be "un-optimized" once again.
The Optimizer also wants me to take powers and feats for melee, which is not what this character does. If he wants a melee warlock, he's free to make one. That's my attitude on the matter.
;)
Yes, let''s not turn the issue into an edition war when clearly it's a DM issue.
I experienced the same thing all the time. I wanted to play a fighter. Just fighter, no multiclass or anything fancy. Basic. Simple.
But, the DM (and the rest of the group) is/are big time optimizers. Personally, I hate optimizing. They insisted I take a multiclass level in "ranger" at fifth level because fighters "got nothing" at level 5. It wasn't an issue for me as I was satisfied on getting "stuff" (Abilities/powers/whatever) at higher levels.
So, just to shut them up, I took the level in ranger. But it didn't stop there. The Optimizers insisted I take feat x, and Y and so on.
If the DM wants to bulid a character and have me play it, I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is being told to make a character and not really be part of the process.
Don't get me wrong, suggestions were all to be helpful. But, I had some choices that I wanted to make that in order to keep the peace, I took. That's when I got passive agressive.
That super feat I just HAD to have and the character completly sucks if I don't take it? Yeah, I went out of my way to NOT use it at all. Ever.
They never even noticed.
This situation continued on to our 4e game where I intentionally selected powers for my Warlock outside his pact. Why? I liked fire bolt. I'm not required to take only star pact powers, and Fire bolt hits the target and anyone around them. Great for what I did. (I hang back and fire from a safe distance.) The optimizer in my group insisted I take the star pact power for that level rather than the fire bolt. This one time I didn't object and took the power change only because I thought to myself "How many warlocks do I ever plan to play?" I want to check out what all the powers do.
Which means when we level up, he will be "un-optimized" once again.
The Optimizer also wants me to take powers and feats for melee, which is not what this character does. If he wants a melee warlock, he's free to make one. That's my attitude on the matter.
;)
Why can't I find players like you.
My players seem to have that kind of attitude as well. Fair enough you can pick the best feats/powers ect to make your character good, but you don't have to into extremes.
Are you a good RPer. In my experaince, players who don't care if the feat they choose has the best benifet, are the best RPers.
But seriously, that is quite awful. just play for a little while and then announce you're quitting mid session, and challenge the others to leave too, especially since you probably CAN FIND another DM amongst you all. heck, run by the book published adventures, it can be fun to learn how to yourself and give those players what will be a much better experience if you're nervy and up for it.
Leave the awful DM to his awful self, and maybe he will learn then.
As for the whole I can just make my own backstory comment. Sure I could but Im playing with blank characters with no story. I would be the only person who had a story and whats the fun in that. The game it self runs exactly like a pc/console vid game you just login and play. I personally prefer games where everyone has a background story and everyone knows each other story and thus makes people care wether the guy next to you dies.
Even if I dont know the other persons story the DM dose and thus creating a rp feel when we go to town and some one notices them and creates a character driven not skill driven conversation. This aslo creates character driven quests not just hey we are going here becuase the dm said we are.
Eject Eject Eject!!!!!!!!!!!
If you'll allow me to de-rail the thread for a moment I'd like to point out that that's a terrible example, FFT, or at the very least FFTA and FFTA2, are about matching the proper skills and items together to make unbeatable characters. if you play the game right, you'll only ever need one guy for any given mission.
a better example would be a game that gives players set skills at each level-up. final fantasy tactics adds a bigger element of customization than almost any other game I'm aware of, if not the most.
sorry. carry on.
It's true. D&D Tactics would be more like your character roleplays for you in cutscenes, but you get total control over his advancement. What the OP is playing is probably more like Final Fantasy I.
I've been told repeatedly these are the "4e" forums. As such, I figured that if someone's pointing out that something sucks, it must be regarding 4e.
I'll take "Thinly Veiled Edition Attack" for $500, Alex.
There are only two things in life that are still pretty good even when they're bad, and D&D ain't one of 'em. Life is too short to waste any of it on crap games like that.
I'll take "Thinly Veiled Edition Attack" for $500, Alex.
Wrong, but only because it wasn't veiled at all, not even thinly.
Wrong, but only because it wasn't veiled at all, not even thinly.
Okay, I'll give you that one.
I've been told repeatedly these are the "4e" forums. As such, I figured that if someone's pointing out that something sucks, it must be regarding 4e.
The 'What's a Player to Do?" section is part of the 'D&D Community' section of the forums. The 4E forums are above it on the main D&D forums page.
Alright so I finally get in a game after months of searching for a group with open space. I wasnt to sure as to what class I wanted to play and I got told they need a tank. I was fine with that so I picked out 1st level spells,skills, and feats. I asked if I could write up a backstory and was told that I could but it wouldnt be read and it would have bearing on the game.
So right off the bat Im put off becuase to me the background stories make me want to actually keep my character alive. With out them not only do I not care about my character but I dont care about the other peoples character becuase they are simply chess pieces on a board.
As for the real problem it goes like this we have no control over are characters, at all. We dont know when we level or how much exp we earned after the session. We arent allowed to take the character sheets home and guess what when we do level we dont get to pick our new spells,skills, or feats. Its all controled by the GM and the GM dose this becuase we might try and optimize are characters.
This to me is tottal bs and now Im stuck playing a character I have no interest in playing, with a game that has no backstory or even a simple reason for why we are all here. Heck the only reason Im still playing is in fear of not finding a group with space and if I leave this group its done becuase we are skeleton group (4 players)
So any suggestions on how to take back control of my pc? Or should I just leave in hopes of finding a new game?
If it were me, I'd run screaming from this game. If you can stomach your way through it, and need a D&D fix, then I'd start looking for another group, and only leave when you find one.
The DM makes all the choices for leveling? That is awful.
DMG, Page 195
Playing Without a DM
This might seem to be strange advice for a Dungeon Master's Guide, but it's entirely possible to play D&D without a Dungeon Master. If all you're looking for is fun and exciting combat, with no more than the barest hint of a plotline, a random dungeon with a random encounter deck is all you need.
From the sound of it you need something else, anything else. if you can't find a DM, you can still play without one. Get the other players to boycott with you and play a no-DM game if you can't find someone to run between the four of you.
Check websites like P&P to see if there are people looking for players, etc. Your local gaming store, your little brother, etc.
I also don't see a need for players to know when precisely they are going to level. It is the lack of control over build and advancement that troubles me somewhat. I understand that 3.5 has some ridiculously abusive builds that don't even make sense, so if the DM wants to work with the players to ensure no one tries to twink out their character in a way that breaks the game then that is one thing-- build controlling the build and advancement itself is really weird. How does the DM even go about doing that?
I'd like to hear the DM's perspective on the reasons he is running the characters in this manner.
I don't see a particular problem with the DM keeping the character sheets with the adventure-- simply because it makes it so it is certain that the players don't lose them. I mean, that really isn't a big deal right there. I have a tendancy to lose my character sheets at times, so I'd almost prefer it if the DM keeps it in a folder for me.
I also don't see a need for players to know when precisely they are going to level. It is the lack of control over build and advancement that troubles me somewhat. I understand that 3.5 has some ridiculously abusive builds that don't even make sense, so if the DM wants to work with the players to ensure no one tries to twink out their character in a way that breaks the game then that is one thing-- build controlling the build and advancement itself is really weird. How does the DM even go about doing that?
I'd like to hear the DM's perspective on the reasons he is running the characters in this manner.
Point 1, I agree with. Our gaming community(meaning the two groups I'm involved in, one as a player, one as a DM) does this. there is a white folder for Mobar's game, and a maroon one for mine. Both folders are at the house for character tweaking, but usually, the DM takes the sheets home. He can then look at any changes made, etc, if we level up at the end of a session.
Reason for Character tweaks:Brand new players at level 2.
Point 2, Well, I don't know that we need to know, but as a DM, I'd rather the players track experience, as that's one less thing I have to do. My players are RP oriented enough that they are not XP hungry.
As a player, not too keen on that information being "withheld" for, I'm sure, "for my own good."
Point 3, while I'm sure the convoluted reason he or she would come up with is good in their own mind, I can't see what could make me think it's a good reason for the DM to distrust his players this much.
If you'll allow me to de-rail the thread for a moment I'd like to point out that that's a terrible example, FFT, or at the very least FFTA and FFTA2, are about matching the proper skills and items together to make unbeatable characters. if you play the game right, you'll only ever need one guy for any given mission.
a better example would be a game that gives players set skills at each level-up. final fantasy tactics adds a bigger element of customization than almost any other game I'm aware of, if not the most
sorry. carry on.
Dude, shut up and stop nitpicking, it's just an example.
Dude, shut up and stop nitpicking, it's just an example.
but it's a terrible example. an example that makes absolutely no sense. It's as if I said "the problem is the pen isn't writing: it's acting more like a pencil, and animating onions into tiny, sword-wielding henchmen" you'd point out both obvious flaws in that comparison, wouldn't you?
that is equivalent to what he said.
Note that already experienced players generally would not stand for this so it seems to happen to the INexperienced group the DM forms after his former group has rightfully abandoned him or he's driven them away.
Now, in a sense this would be a very freeing approach to roleplaying and I can see the appeal for some in experimenting with it. However, it would be poor form indeed to take advantage of players who really don't know better rather than giving them the informed choice of taking this radical, limiting approach. And it IS radically limiting. D&D is a roleplaying GAME. The game does not lie ONLY in the roleplaying - it lies in the players ability to set basic mechanical parameters for their character and to CHOOSE the ways in which that character will mechanically develop. How likely is it that an entire group of players prefers to have that right denied to them unless they have never been allowed proper knowledge of what it is their giving up and WHY the DM wants to deny them that most basic of rights - the right to control their own character?
Now if the OP joined this game with the knowledge that that's how it would be then he needs to ask himself if the game is still enjoyable enough to continue to put up with it. If so, then try to embrace the roleplaying advantage it DOES give you in not thinking about your character in any kind of mechanical terms. If not, then just bow out of the game gracefully. Do NOT leave in the middle of a game session or call at the last minute. Even if the DM is doing this because he's a class A jerk take the high road and give the DM as much lead time as possible to replace you or adjust his game to deal with your absence.
If the DM really IS just myopic and not a jerk then your actual departure might prompt him to get with the program and turn his game around to some semblence of normality. You don't want to burn bridges just out of spite.
Speaking personally, DM interference with MY control of MY character is a sacrilege that I simply will not tolerate for a moment, and if I wanted to be in a freeform RPG then I'd prefer to play one that is DESIGNED to be run that way and INTENDED to be played that way.
I don't see a particular problem with the DM keeping the character sheets with the adventure-- simply because it makes it so it is certain that the players don't lose them. I mean, that really isn't a big deal right there. I have a tendancy to lose my character sheets at times, so I'd almost prefer it if the DM keeps it in a folder for me.
To me that is only OK so long as the Player(s) agree to it. One of my Players keeps an entire folder at my place because he tended to forget to bring his character along quite a few times. But it was his idea to keep it at my place. Once in a while he will take it home so he can rewrite the character on a new character sheet, but that does not happen all that often. I would not have a problem with any of my players keeping their character sheets at my place, but I would never demand that they keep their sheets at my place.
If some players do forget their character sheets on a regular basis a good compromise is for the DM to keep a copy of their character sheet at his place. I have an electronic copy (Excel Spreadsheets) of all the characters of my players, and it gets updated every time they level up. It generally does NOT contain everything that they have (such as mundane equipment) but it contains all the vital information, such as stats and magical equipment and saving throws and all that. While it can sometimes be a bit of a pain to update the sheets, they have served their purpose well as at least everyone in my group has forgotten their character sheet at least once.
Do what they do on these forums...
Tell them they are stupid and doing it wrong.
:D
This post is stupid. Besides, you posted it all wrong. :D
/joke
:D
To me that is only OK so long as the Player(s) agree to it. One of my Players keeps an entire folder at my place because he tended to forget to bring his character along quite a few times. But it was his idea to keep it at my place. Once in a while he will take it home so he can rewrite the character on a new character sheet, but that does not happen all that often. I would not have a problem with any of my players keeping their character sheets at my place, but I would never demand that they keep their sheets at my place.
I've always preferred the DM to keep sheets because it means he has easy access to them when planning adventures. It's impossible to remember everything your PCs can do, or can't do; looking over the sheets before planning a game helps stop you from creating a situation the PCs simply can't get out of.
That's by far the lesser of the issues here, though. "I keep the sheets" is not a problem. "I kept the sheets, levelled you up and you took feat X, power Y, and skill Z because I said so" is the big no-no.
I've always preferred the DM to keep sheets because it means he has easy access to them when planning adventures. It's impossible to remember everything your PCs can do, or can't do; looking over the sheets before planning a game helps stop you from creating a situation the PCs simply can't get out of.
That's by far the lesser of the issues here, though. "I keep the sheets" is not a problem. "I kept the sheets, levelled you up and you took feat X, power Y, and skill Z because I said so" is the big no-no.
Indeed, I was going to post a message saying that keeping the sheets is fine.
From the beginning of my campaign, I requested that everyone left their sheets with me. However, they can take them home if they leave me an updated copy.
All of my players decided to just leave them there, but one of them decided to leave the copy. But he didn't update it. Since level 1.
We were level 5 characters at this point, and when this player left his home with his character sheet, he took the wrong sheet. He had the same name for two different characters from different campaigns. So he basically spent the first hour of play time guessing his character's updated stats and choosing his spells.
So I always want a copy of the sheet for the reason of players forgetting their sheets at home.
Also, I always look at their skills, spells, and abilities to make sure that my adventures are suitable for them, so that they can find useful ways to use their abilities without completely breaking the adventure.
The 'What's a Player to Do?" section is part of the 'D&D Community' section of the forums. The 4E forums are above it on the main D&D forums page.
Sarcasm, Shadow. Sarcasm.
to the OP: Your character is precisely that, yours. And don't be afraid to make a scene or something about it; wusses that go out of their way to avoid conflict won't be taken seriously. Chewing someone out is often like asking questions; doing so publicly educates the rest of the class, too.
Be gentle if you can, but be an ******* if you must.
When i read the part about the dm choosing the powers i had to laugh a little. I would have asked him "Are you joking?" I would have been flabergasted if a dm insisted on that level of control. Flabergasted and then absent from the next game.
If a DM had tried that with my character I would have taken a pencil, visibly erased the choice he made, and made the choide of my own.
You're trapped in a game style I call "Dungeons and Dragons: Tactics". Like the Final Fantasy game of similar nomenclature, the plotline is there, but optional, and the game focuses mostly on the direct use of skills, abilities, and combat from the character sheet and battle grid. This is a gamestyle that I fear will grow by leaps and bounds due to 4e because some of its rules encourage the behavior, or at the very least fail to discourage it.
This is the biggest load of crap I have seen in a good long while. Clearly you didn't read what the OP was saying and obviously saw someone disliking the game for some reason and thought you would chime in with a generic blasting of 4th edition.
They aren't playing a game of direct use of skills and abilities from the character sheet because he wasn't allowed a character sheet to look at! If anything this is a reverse of what you are saying because the DM decided that the game was too focused on stats and abilities so he tried to take the stats out of the game to encourage roleplaying and thinking of your character as a character instead of a load of stats.
He did it wrong of course, because D&D is meant to be a mix of stat playing and roleplaying, and to completely eliminate one or the other hurts the game, and also players do not necessarily know everything their character knows because they aren't actually feeling or seeing everything. For example, the character might know "I need healing" because he can barely stand and has taken a lot of hits, but the player doesn't necessarily know that unless his hit point total is in front of him! We allow a certain amount of metagaming to compensate for the fact that there are things that would be apparent to the character that aren't inherently apparent to the player, and that's what the character sheet is for.
First thing to do, ask him WHY you aren't allowed your character sheets during the game. From there you can possibly reach some sort of accord, since you might know an alternative that would help accomplish what the DM is looking for.
If the reason the DM gives is not to your liking, you can simply walk away.
To the Original Poster:
You're trapped in a game style I call "Dungeons and Dragons: Tactics". Like the Final Fantasy game of similar nomenclature, the plotline is there, but optional, and the game focuses mostly on the direct use of skills, abilities, and combat from the character sheet and battle grid. This is a gamestyle that I fear will grow by leaps and bounds due to 4e because some of its rules encourage the behavior, or at the very least fail to discourage it.
FASA developed a game that was perfect for this playstyle (Battletech), but the massive hole in the fun left by a lack of RP led to the creation of MechWarrior, a BattleTech addon that introduced PCs to the game instead of simply tactical units on an abstract storyline.
I have no idea why D&D seems to be progressing in reverse order, but it's a bad move.
I digress. Bail on the adventure; DMs may be hard to find, but bad games are far too easy to end up in .
Hello folks! If you on our daily trivia challenge you guessed B for "Taking a potshot at 4E" then you win!
Clearly you didn't read what the OP was saying and obviously saw someone disliking the game for some reason and thought you would chime in with a generic blasting of 4th edition.
This is what CorvusDrake does. He does it with such frequency and reliability, I assume he was being paid to do so. :D
Leave and take the rest of the players with you since obviously the GM can run the game without you. Seriously, confront the GM as a united front and tell him/her to lighten up or you all walk, then find a new GM.
(this is the point where someone posts a link to youtube showing Hitler ranting and raving about "power-gamers")
Run. Screaming.
Do what they do on these forums...
Tell them they are stupid and doing it wrong.
:D
Fixed. :D
The 'What's a Player to Do?" section is part of the 'D&D Community' section of the forums. The 4E forums are above it on the main D&D forums page.
Actually what you are referring to as the 4E forums is the "D&D Fundamentals" section. All forums are meant for 4th Edition, that is why there is a "D&D Previous Editions" section.
on a rolling donut and walk out. I fail to see any reason to put up with precisely the same sort of bull just cos the game being played is D&D.
I don't think you should just up and leave. I think you need to find out WHY the DM is not letting you have your character sheets, and talk about alternatives and working through it first. People tend to have knee jerk reactions to stupid stuff (and let's face it, that was a stupid move taking character sheets away) but forget that this is not just some rules arbiter, he is a friend. And probably a well meaning one who just needs to better understand the game and his friends.
Actually what you are referring to as the 4E forums is the "D&D Fundamentals" section. All forums are meant for 4th Edition, that is why there is a "D&D Previous Editions" section.
Yes it is called 'D&D Fundamentals' but you'll also notice that each sub-section in that forum section has '4E' at the beginning of each sub-section title.
This section of the forum is not called '4E What's a Player to Do'(nor is there any other sub-section besides those within 'D&D Fundmentals' that are labeled 4E, the only exceptions are two within the Legacy Forums section.)
The 'D&D Previous Editions' section is for discussing things such as equippement, monsters, skills, feats, etc. Which relate to the previous editions. The D&D Community section is still an 'all editions' section.
It makes me sad when people come to the boards with an interesting problem and never tell us how it was resolved.
Actually I think the OP did tell us that he decided to leave the group, also stating that he had found another to play with, first page somewhere. Though I wish he would return anyway for any future gaming related questions.
This is what CorvusDrake does. He does it with such frequency and reliability, I assume he was being paid to do so. :D
Or he's a disgruntled employee trying to get his revenge by bad mouthing the company product.
It makes me sad when people come to the boards with an interesting problem and never tell us how it was resolved.
Sometimes leaving the game and finding a new one is the only way to "resolve" it.
While I've never encountered DMs to this extreme I have encountered some with crazy idea over the years like Fire creatures the were vulnerable to fire but resist cold?!? And not telling the players until after the campaign.
But anyway out of the many "crazy" DMs I've seen over the years a lot of them I've found are dead set in their ways. Most of the problems like the one in the OP are from DMs who think they know better then the creators of the game. That right there shows they are extremely arrogant. And arrogant people don't tend accept the fact that they might be wrong. In fact many take it as an insult to even suggest they are doing it wrong.
I don't really get into yelling matches but I've seen some over the years. And DMs who implement their own crazy house rules like the one in the OP rarely give in. Now that's not saying there aren't exceptions and the DM could be talked out of it. I'm just saying don't hold out to much hope has been my experience.
It seems to mainly depend on the group dynamic. If your lone person joining a new group odds are not good. If it's a group of friends that know each other including the DM then odds can be a bit more favorable depending on the rule, the DM, and etc.
Or he's a disgruntled employee trying to get his revenge by bad mouthing the company product.
Wow....just wow. I read this and nearly spat my breakfast out all over my laptop.
No, no, I assure you I work in an industry that cators to jerks like myself. I work in the finance industry. I'm a loan shark, from the sale to when we have to repossess it when people can't or don't pay. Before that, I managed top-tier tech support, another industry that has a very low tolerance for the stupid.
I blast 4e because it supports a way of thinking that is just...bad. When WotC announced its purchase of TSR, i turned to my friends and said, "Watch...they'll update 3.0 a little, then they'll make an edition that plays a lot more like Magic and takes out Evil PCs.
And lo, the prophecy cometh true.
The way of thinking it promotes just happens to be the source of many a jackass comment I've seen on here. Thus, the flames of 4e.
So first I must re-say that I have found a new group and we should be playing soon. I think we are waiting for one more player and we will be good to go. This group is all about backstories and creating a compelling game driven by story and great encounters. This will also be in 4th edition for those that are dead set on knowing this info :D
As for the last group I did leave but please know that I have been playing DnD for 9 to 10 years now I only asked my question to see if this is a new thing/status quo for 4th as it was my first time using the system. I kindly told the group that if I cant control my character then I will leave. The DM said that he must have control of the character so know one is stronger than anyone else and to speed up the game. Apparently it takes people days to lvl up according to him and he is good that it only takes 2 minutes. At that I laughed and riped my character sheet and left the table.
Also as a side note this was my very first game that used a battle map and I gotta say I dont like em. I started playing dnd during 2nd edition and we simply used are imagination and through that we learned how to keep track of 7 players and up to 12 monster as to their location. In 4th edition however with all its push,pull,slide it seems you must use a battlemap. However I fully believe that you can keep track of this via imagination and not some $20 plastic square sheet.
Seems to me like the DM just wants to play with himself...
I blast 4e because it supports a way of thinking that is just...bad. When WotC announced its purchase of TSR, i turned to my friends and said, "Watch...they'll update 3.0 a little, then they'll make an edition that plays a lot more like Magic and takes out Evil PCs.
And lo, the prophecy cometh true.
The most impressive part of your prophecy is you predicted their changes to 3e when in fact 3e itself didn't come out until well after WotC bought TSR.
The most impressive part of your prophecy is you their changes to 3e when in fact it didn't come out until well after WotC bought TSR.
And let us not forget "CorvusDrake No Like" is not synonymous with "Bad", and it's pretty much unbridled arrogance and snottery for him to think that.
The most impressive part of your prophecy is you their changes to 3e when in fact it didn't come out until well after WotC bought TSR.
You do realize that TSR already had 3e in the works long BEFORE WotC bought TSR? Those of us who were playing in the late 80's and early 90's were following its development. Thus, it made sense.
And of course I'm arrogant, Salla. It's one of those things that comes with being better than you ^.^
then they'll make an edition that plays a lot more like an actual game and continue to discourage Evil PCs like they've been doing since 2nd edition.
Fixed
Fixed
Well done!
When WotC announced its purchase of TSR, i turned to my friends and said, "Watch...they'll update 3.0 a little, then they'll make an edition that plays a lot more like Magic and takes out Evil PCs.
You have precognition? Wizards of the Coast purchased TSR in 1997, when 2nd Edition AD&D was the current rule set being used. 3.0 was not released until three years AFTER the purchase of TSR. :D
You have precognition? Wizards of the Coast purchased TSR in 1997, when 2nd Edition AD&D was the current rule set being used. 3.0 was not released until three years AFTER the purchase of TSR. :D
Not precognition. I had a phone line modem. Reading comprehension, man, reread my earlier post. Believe it or not, discussion of future editions of things is not a recent invention
You do realize that TSR already had 3e in the works long BEFORE WotC bought TSR? Those of us who were playing in the late 80's and early 90's were following its development. Thus, it made sense.
You do realize that this is not true, right?
TSR were halfheartedly working on a third edition before the company was run into the ground. The version WotC released was started from ground-zero after they salvaged TSR's hollow husk.
I'm like you. I prefer to have a character with a backstory. I'm not fussed if the GM is not going to read it (although I like it when they do and incorporate it into the story). Its a real help in determing the character's personality and how he would respond to certain situations. Even if the DM has no intention of using it in play, it can serve as a warning to how the character may react in game and provide a chance for the DM to know where certain problems may lie with the character before the game even starts. But enough of that.
I've also not got a problem with the DM keeping character sheets. There's always the possibility that a player might not make it to the session so it helps for the DM to have the sheet. It also helps him/her prepare. I do prefer to keep a copy for myself. This is much easier since most of my character's are built on customised sheets designed in inDesign. I already have an electronic copy that I can update after each game.
I'm even kinda cool with the DM not giving out XP publically. I say kinda, because it needs a huge amount of trust.
What is sacrosant is player choice in character improvement. A DM can certainly give advice on what is and isn't appropriate. If your character has never shown any ability for magic, nor any inclination to learn about, yet suddenly starts throwing magic missiles, it's going to take a really good bit of fluff to justify it. But a DM removing the player entirely from the equation? Not allowing the player's to have any control over how their PCs level up? That would make me walk. I have only ever faced one DM like this, in a Shadowrun game. The GM was dissatisfied that my character was weaker than the rest of the party, so he contrived to get the character locked in a basement and permanently possessed by some sort of spirit giving him new powers and abilities, but completely destroying his personality and character. I walked from that game shortly afterwards.
Okay, now that the people who read the above have the WTF?! is he saying out of their system, I'll continue.
Stay in the game, provided of course, that the story is of good to excellent quality. In a way there is nothing inherently wrong with being given a character to play. A role as it were. It depends on your mindset. You see, the actors who get the role of Romeo and Juliet know how the story is going to end. The trick is conveying the character and the emotions they embody during each scene - to equate it to your problem your character is, to follow the example, either Romeo or Juliet. Everything your character is supposed to do is laid out for you, but you still have to option to make the character 'yours', by breathing life into the role with your emotions and performance.
As to the background, and once again this is from an acting stand point - you background means squat to the story at present. The DM or director, if you will, doesn't care about any back story you make up for the character only that you can convey the right qualities for the scene. In fact, anytime an actor gets a role, they should create a back story for their character, for their use only, to help them identify and portray said character. It is a helpful tool.
Of course, my viewpoint is based on the fact that I am an actor, and while it is generally considered that making your own character in the game is the correct way to play, it can be gratifying and educational to play the game in another way.
Now, as stated, my advice is quite contrary to what others have said, but as noted before it does come with a caveat. I'll use another example to explain: If your DM's style is the equivalent running a game about vampires, and your DM is named Bram Stoker stay in the game. If your DM is running the same type of game and is named.. oh, lets say, Stephanie Meyer.. then run as fast and hard as you can, but first maybe throw a bag of sparkles at the DM for kicks and giggles. They'll be finding those things on them for weeks.
Now, this might be relevant to anyone who needs help making a background, or at least getting a personality for a character, answer these questions:
Who Am I?
Name:
Birthplace:
Date:
Parents:
Education:
Dreams:
Likes/Passions:
Dislikes/Hates:
Politics:
Religion:
Humour:
Food:
Vices:
Sexuality:
Occupation:
Love Interests:
Friends:
Ten Years From Now:
Twenty Years From Now:
Causes:
Health:
Worries:
Where You Live:
Economics:
Money:
Time:
Material Possessions:
Car:
Clothes:
Shoes:
Fantasies:
Lies:
Colours:
Country:
Neighbourhood:
Sisters:
Brothers:
Grandparents:
Favorites:
Hobbies:
Obsessions:
Poetry:
Books:
Art:
Home Life:
Children:
Philosophy Of Life:
What are my circumstances?
What is my story about?
Why should people see it?
What is extraordinary?
Unusual?
Evocative?
Name:
Birthplace:
Date:
Parents:
Education:
Dreams:
Likes/Passions:
Dislikes/Hates:
Politics:
Religion:
Humour:
Food:
Vices:
Sexuality:
Occupation:
Love Interests:
Friends:
Ten Years From Now:
Twenty Years From Now:
Causes:
Health:
Worries:
Where You Live:
Economics:
Money:
Time:
Material Possessions:
Car:
Clothes:
Shoes:
Fantasies:
Lies:
Colours:
Country:
Neighbourhood:
Sisters:
Brothers:
Grandparents:
Favorites:
Hobbies:
Obsessions:
Poetry:
Books:
Art:
Home Life:
Children:
Philosophy Of Life:
What are my circumstances?
What is my story about?
Why should people see it?
What is extraordinary?
Unusual?
Evocative?
Leave - I would anyway. A game like that really takes the fun out of it for me.
Dont forget to take with you all the pizza, drink, and chips you showed up with too.
I would leave, do not pass go, go directly to your local game store and look for a new group!
A DM that asks for NO backstory???!?!?! That is a complete 180 from what any DM worth his salt would want. And not being able to customize your character with choices? That is by far the best part of D&D, being able to make choices. The DM should be able to allow/disallow material he finds either incongruent or unbalanced, but this is going WAY too far. I'm surprised this guy doesn't ban roleplaying and dictate conversation via script. Sheesh!
I was asked to run a game for people I've been gaming with for twenty years. So I ran them a Serenity game. Just showed up with characters designed to work together (reasonably well, but some possibilities for friction also built in), handed them out to the people I thought most appropriate, and we went for it. It was a blast.
That said, they had the characters once I handed them over. I gave them outlines of backstories based on their various capabilities, but gender, name, and details were all them. They also were then in charge of character advancement.
It worked well, but I think it worked primarily because I know these people extremely well, and made good calls on giving people characters that they might not have designed for themselves, but would enjoy playing. There was a mix of assigned characters and choice, and (importantly) they had the choice of what direction to go in with the character.
Well I didnt say the edition becuase well its a DM issue not an edition issue. However it is 4th that we are "playing"...
That makes it both better and worse. Since in 4th edition every character gets the same xp, and there isn't anything that costs xp, it is reasonable for a DM to just level everyone at the same time. (I do this in part because I have some players who can't, for a variety of reasons, make each game.) It also makes it easier for me as a DM -- I basically level them every two or three sessions, which works out to about eight or so encounters and skill challenges, and about the right number of magic items.
It also makes it worse, because in 4th edition you have much more flexibility in character improvement (because you don't get tied down to feat trees and prestige class pre-requisites), and it's pretty hard to mini-max a character who is built level-by-level.
He wants to play with himself.
I completely agree with this and think that you should leave so that he can do it in private. Characters are suppost to be the one thing that players have [almost] complete control over. You should be the one picking how they advance and keeping your character.
So let the guy be alone, maybe suggest to the other players that you all leave if they're not having fun either and then look for a DM as a group.
You do realize that TSR already had 3e in the works long BEFORE WotC bought TSR? Those of us who were playing in the late 80's and early 90's were following its development. Thus, it made sense.
And of course I'm arrogant, Salla. It's one of those things that comes with being better than you ^.^
You mean the game (3rd Ed) that is heavily based on the WOTC game Talislanta, right? You might want to Google the name "Jonathan Tweet". BLOOOOOPER
The only thing you can really do is to talk to him and if he won't listen to reason, either quit or keep playing depending on how much it bothers you. This sort of thing is a problem because everyone gets something different out of roleplaying and for me it would make it not worth playing. Try negotiating with him. What can you really lose.
Yea the next session will be my last and I'll be telling him why it is. Of course I'll tell him in a calm manner and I will feel a little bad as me leaving will simply kill the game for the other people. Unless they are able to find another person for the next session. They have been trying to find more players but when they interview them the people leave becuase they have no control over what they want to play.
I'd talk to the other players, away from the DM if possible. Be subsersive a bit. Explain to them what they're missing by letting the DM control all their choices. You might end up increasing their enjoyment of the game in the long run, and if so, you've done a good work.
Shoot him. In the face. With a hammer. Twice
Bolding, italicization and the word they're used on mine.
From the sound of it you need something else, anything else. if you can't find a DM, you can still play without one. Get the other players to boycott with you and play a no-DM game if you can't find someone to run between the four of you.
Check websites like P&P to see if there are people looking for players, etc. Your local gaming store, your little brother, etc.
Hell yeah. I've played without a DM, and we even managed to have plot. not even a simple plot. it was basically a collaberative writing project, each of the writing inclined people in the group writing a new general outline for a story arc after one was done. NPCs were played by whichever characters weren't interacting directly with them. once or twice, cuz it was funny for the other players, I'd play the npc my pc was interacting with, even one time having a conversation with my pc and two npcs, but was just for kicks.
As a player, not too keen on that information being "withheld" for, I'm sure, "for my own good."
I'm with you on that. heh, not just as a player either.
Careful. This is the internet, and that could start a political debate anywhere. :P
If a DM had tried that with my character I would have taken a pencil, visibly erased the choice he made, and made the choide of my own.
Sounds like something I'd do. If he objected I would fix him with The Stare I inherited from my father, and if he didn't back down (kind of rare when I resort to The Stare) I'd explain to him in clear, unmistakable terms that I will not tolerate anyone, in any aspect of my life, trying to take over direct control of what is mine. Ever. No conflict avoidance, no wiggle room.
Then again, I have absolutely no problem simply telling my DM "no" in cases like this. I've had a DM try to tell me what choices I was going to make with a character. I responding with a calm but unmistakably final "no". He was taken aback, but when I explained to him that my character is the one aspect of the game I am in control of, and that I require that control to enjoy the game, and to continue playing, he let it go.
While I've never encountered DMs to this extreme I have encountered some with crazy idea over the years like Fire creatures the were vulnerable to fire but resist cold?!? And not telling the players until after the campaign.
Makes sense. What's the problem? :P
Ok vulnerable to fire makes no sense, but I definately see the argument for resist cold. I mean, if you cry to inflict cold damage on something that's made of fire, some of that cold is going to dissapate without ever touching the creature.
Wow....just wow. I read this and nearly spat my breakfast out all over my laptop.
No, no, I assure you I work in an industry that cators to jerks like myself. I work in the finance industry. I'm a loan shark, from the sale to when we have to repossess it when people can't or don't pay. Before that, I managed top-tier tech support, another industry that has a very low tolerance for the stupid.
I blast 4e because it supports a way of thinking that is just...bad. When WotC announced its purchase of TSR, i turned to my friends and said, "Watch...they'll update 3.0 a little, then they'll make an edition that plays a lot more like Magic and takes out Evil PCs.
And lo, the prophecy cometh true.
The way of thinking it promotes just happens to be the source of many a jackass comment I've seen on here. Thus, the flames of 4e.
What way of thinking is that? Thinking of the basic rules as combat thing, and the RP stuff as something to well, roleplay? Deciding for yourself exactly what it means, in roleplaying terms, to be a fighter, wizard, barbarian, etc rather than waiting for the game designers to tell you what it means? realizing that dnd isn't gurps, you don't need the underwater basket weaving skill, and hold breath to be able to weave a basket underwater, it's ok to just put it in your backstory and go from there?
did I miss anything?
I'm sorry, I'll have more respect for flamers of 4e when they start providing cogent, logical arguments based on premises that make sense.