Moderator: Mods
-
Liquidprism
- Lost Soul
- Posts: 1509
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:40 pm
- Location: Behind You...
Playing what way?
All things in moderation...Except syrup.
<a href="http://www.wizards.com/magic/playmagic/ ... areyou.asp" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.wizards.com/magic/images/wha ... isblue.jpg" border="0">
<b>Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.</b></a>
<a href="http://www.wizards.com/magic/playmagic/ ... areyou.asp" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.wizards.com/magic/images/wha ... isblue.jpg" border="0">
<b>Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.</b></a>
OK I have lurked on this topic long enough. I haven't played much with the people here, but I have played long enough to realize what I like no matter the setting.
1. Overall I want a medium pace for any settings I play in. Too fast and the general fun that is created around the table is lost. I also don't want table creep to kill the story. The more immersive the story the faster I want it to go.
2. I am one who likes to see about 50% action/life or death adventure (with a cool villain/nemesis/rival) and about 50% roleplay and I want 90-100% of these to be plot focused. I don't mind something a bit random to kill time but don't give me one night of all social interaction and then one game spent killing an army of useless foes that aren't even reasonable fodder for a plot villain. I only say 90-100% because I can enjoy things like friendly player conflict/rivalry as long as the players keep it in the game.
3. When I run, I want to see players develop and make decisions based on plot, not power. I don't discourage players getting more powerful, but I don’t want to see nothing but min/maxing on the character sheet so they will never lose/be overbalanced to other characters who don't read all the rules. I am actually put off from running when I announce that I would run a game and someone develops a power build without even playing one game. As a player I have to try very hard to not munchkin out a character. I have come to a compromise that works very well for me if I am playing a game with a GM who is less mechanics strong and/or inexperienced than I am. I come up with one really fun shtick that I want a character to do. For example, using DnD as an example I played a fighter who decided to always be ready for whatever kind of combat was called for by carrying multiple weapon types and switching round by round with quick draw. Another character I designed was setup to not be unkillable but was more capable of pushing past the pain and able to keep going effectively long after others would suffer penalties for their wounds or even succumb to them. I really hate it when someone either belittles my shtick as useless or outright steals my shtick in game. Other than a shtick or neat trick my character can do, I could care less what happens rules wise.
4. Story should dictate power not mechanics. I don't want rules lawyering to kill pace in the middle of combat or to kill a clever idea even if it hurts us. An example of bad mechanics happened to me once in a railroaded event where the party was trapped in a tunnel and stumped as to what to do next. I was playing a character that had a spell to shape earth. I thought I could shape some stairs and a way out of this tunnel. The GM, as unfamiliar with the spell as I was when I found it looked it up read the rules and said the amount moved was just too small to be useful. Although mechanically it was true it was not put in a way to encourage another creative idea. I was just shut down on the spot and said, “No, you can’t cast that spell.” It wasn't that you cast the spell and the amount of earth you moved was nowhere near enough to do what you need it was just no that won't work. The rest of the party was as stuck and annoyed at failures as I was. Players are usually worse than that. I can get bad and get competitive too, but no one is perfect. I hope that good players will call me out on this when it happens.
5. I hate being useless. I don't have to be the center of attention but I don't want to just sit there while everyone else is doing something. I hate immobilization spells and being captured with no means of escape. I understand it is necessary for plot purposes, I have done it to my own players occasionally, and have even let myself get caught once to advance a story. I don't expect every fight to be fair as they are usually not but I want at least one way that isn't too cheesy to emerge alive. Not necessarily victorious (and certainly not unscathed wounds build character ;D), but alive.
6. Finally, I play games to escape the humdrum. I want something different and more exciting than my typical day. I usually prefer heroic games and tales because there is usually more avenue for escapism and I can lose myself easier in them.
1. Overall I want a medium pace for any settings I play in. Too fast and the general fun that is created around the table is lost. I also don't want table creep to kill the story. The more immersive the story the faster I want it to go.
2. I am one who likes to see about 50% action/life or death adventure (with a cool villain/nemesis/rival) and about 50% roleplay and I want 90-100% of these to be plot focused. I don't mind something a bit random to kill time but don't give me one night of all social interaction and then one game spent killing an army of useless foes that aren't even reasonable fodder for a plot villain. I only say 90-100% because I can enjoy things like friendly player conflict/rivalry as long as the players keep it in the game.
3. When I run, I want to see players develop and make decisions based on plot, not power. I don't discourage players getting more powerful, but I don’t want to see nothing but min/maxing on the character sheet so they will never lose/be overbalanced to other characters who don't read all the rules. I am actually put off from running when I announce that I would run a game and someone develops a power build without even playing one game. As a player I have to try very hard to not munchkin out a character. I have come to a compromise that works very well for me if I am playing a game with a GM who is less mechanics strong and/or inexperienced than I am. I come up with one really fun shtick that I want a character to do. For example, using DnD as an example I played a fighter who decided to always be ready for whatever kind of combat was called for by carrying multiple weapon types and switching round by round with quick draw. Another character I designed was setup to not be unkillable but was more capable of pushing past the pain and able to keep going effectively long after others would suffer penalties for their wounds or even succumb to them. I really hate it when someone either belittles my shtick as useless or outright steals my shtick in game. Other than a shtick or neat trick my character can do, I could care less what happens rules wise.
4. Story should dictate power not mechanics. I don't want rules lawyering to kill pace in the middle of combat or to kill a clever idea even if it hurts us. An example of bad mechanics happened to me once in a railroaded event where the party was trapped in a tunnel and stumped as to what to do next. I was playing a character that had a spell to shape earth. I thought I could shape some stairs and a way out of this tunnel. The GM, as unfamiliar with the spell as I was when I found it looked it up read the rules and said the amount moved was just too small to be useful. Although mechanically it was true it was not put in a way to encourage another creative idea. I was just shut down on the spot and said, “No, you can’t cast that spell.” It wasn't that you cast the spell and the amount of earth you moved was nowhere near enough to do what you need it was just no that won't work. The rest of the party was as stuck and annoyed at failures as I was. Players are usually worse than that. I can get bad and get competitive too, but no one is perfect. I hope that good players will call me out on this when it happens.
5. I hate being useless. I don't have to be the center of attention but I don't want to just sit there while everyone else is doing something. I hate immobilization spells and being captured with no means of escape. I understand it is necessary for plot purposes, I have done it to my own players occasionally, and have even let myself get caught once to advance a story. I don't expect every fight to be fair as they are usually not but I want at least one way that isn't too cheesy to emerge alive. Not necessarily victorious (and certainly not unscathed wounds build character ;D), but alive.
6. Finally, I play games to escape the humdrum. I want something different and more exciting than my typical day. I usually prefer heroic games and tales because there is usually more avenue for escapism and I can lose myself easier in them.
re: Deadman
I agree with pretty much all of that, though my play preferences diverge a bit in places. Not so much in overall type, but just in degree.
3. I actually like min/maxing, but I want it to be in theme, and have a story. Min/maxing is normal to an extent, and even heavy min/max is fine a long as everyone is at parity. But min/maxing with no goal other than power is stupid. It's an rpg, and hollow numbers defeat the purpose. "Winning" the game means you are a loser. Being unwilling to lose, even if it forwards the character and MAKES SENSE, means that you lost the game and didn't know it.
4. I agree to an extent, though I will say that I tend to be a bit more reality based. But there is a balance. I think that a firm grounding in rules and a set reality for the game enhances immersion and a sense that what's going on is "real" in that it helps with suspension of disbelief. That said, rulings need to keep in mind story flow, and the type of story being told. And in your example, it seems that the gm didn't even rule realistically, he just used hand-wavium to blanket rule against something, which is actually outside the rules as well.
6. I like the extraordinary, but I also like good size doses of the ordinary. I also REALLY like the extraordinary juxtaposed with the ordinary; superheroes playing baseball on their day off, vampires taking a trip shopping, making jokes in character while drinking coffee and waiting for the mission to start, all of that adds a great deal of depth to a game i think.
I agree with pretty much all of that, though my play preferences diverge a bit in places. Not so much in overall type, but just in degree.
3. I actually like min/maxing, but I want it to be in theme, and have a story. Min/maxing is normal to an extent, and even heavy min/max is fine a long as everyone is at parity. But min/maxing with no goal other than power is stupid. It's an rpg, and hollow numbers defeat the purpose. "Winning" the game means you are a loser. Being unwilling to lose, even if it forwards the character and MAKES SENSE, means that you lost the game and didn't know it.
4. I agree to an extent, though I will say that I tend to be a bit more reality based. But there is a balance. I think that a firm grounding in rules and a set reality for the game enhances immersion and a sense that what's going on is "real" in that it helps with suspension of disbelief. That said, rulings need to keep in mind story flow, and the type of story being told. And in your example, it seems that the gm didn't even rule realistically, he just used hand-wavium to blanket rule against something, which is actually outside the rules as well.
6. I like the extraordinary, but I also like good size doses of the ordinary. I also REALLY like the extraordinary juxtaposed with the ordinary; superheroes playing baseball on their day off, vampires taking a trip shopping, making jokes in character while drinking coffee and waiting for the mission to start, all of that adds a great deal of depth to a game i think.
Threading the Gerbil since 1982
