One Who Tames

Persistent Characters vs "One-and-Done" Characters

@Ammokkx You only seem able to tell me what you can't do. That is one of the reasons I don't see a point in arguing with you. Another is that many of the things you brought up were already answered in my first post. If that wasn't enough for you, then I'm not sure how effective it would be to just repeat myself.

I'm not overly concerned with your desires.

I did explain it. I specifically said that it would be me being spiteful.

Some people like playing a certain personality, capability and/or theme. They like taking a character or character concept and seeing how it would work in a different setting. If you have seen the two Sicario movies before, then consider that as an example; the same or similar characters in two unrelated stories enduring different circumstances. It's not that complicated.

Mortal Kombat Outworld war

Hoo boy. I feel like this might end up catfishing some people and driving away others who might enjoy it based on the title alone.

Personally, I find the idea interesting. I don't know a damn thing about the Outworld but I love world building and nation stuff. The idea of a judge seems pretty interesting but it would need to overcome quite a few issues.

This reminds me of an old German wargame. It was two players and a judge. Each player had an identical map but could not see the other player's stuff unless the judged deemed it so. Whenever the pawns clashed, the judge would then decide the outcome based on his own experience, external factors and the direct capabilities of the units engaged in the fight. Very early style of GMing.

Persistent Characters vs "One-and-Done" Characters

@Ammokkx Don't you fucking start nit-picking over terminology with me. I made it clear what I meant.

I don't really have much more to add without repeating myself. I have no desire to change your mind. Doing so would only ruin what you currently enjoy and that isn't how this one does things. We're just going to have to disagree.

What do you look for when searching for an RP?

The name of the RP is, of course, the first catch. If the name sets off warning bells in the reptilian part of my brain then I stay the fuck away from it. If it seems to mesh with my interests or tickles my curiosity then I check it out. Often, as long as the title doesn't sicken me, I tend to give things a look just for fun. No-brainer so far. For the record, I prefer a micro-summery of the game in the title but this is more of a nit-pick.

If the introduction post is, for whatever reason, difficult to read then I move on. There are some rare exceptions to this @pugbutter. For the most part, my eyes are more important to me than your concept.

If a game requires the beautification of one's post, then you can fuck right off. As a personal rule of thumb, if it took longer to make the post template than it did to write the post itself, then the template is too fucking complicated. I don't even want "pretty" posts in my own games. Also, if you have a character sheet section and still require a picture for every post, then you can fuck right off.

If a game's character sheet is too complicated and arbitrary, then you can fuck right off. If it visibly took more effort to create the character sheet than it did to create the plot for your game, then your priorities are fucked.

I give zero fucks about "face claims". The game should not be about how people look. If a picture is more important to you than the player then your priorities are fucked.

Of course, the content of the game needs to mesh with what I want to play. That should go without saying but it is technically something that could turn me off toward a game. I'm trying to stay away from defining the content I prefer since it doesn't seem relevant.

Something that can make me lose interest at any point in the process are the other people who seem interested in the story. I do my damnedest to not give GMs the wrong impression toward my intentions. If I decide the people are not tolerable then I will gently let the GM know that it is time for me to depart.

If the GM doesn't live up to something they advertised then I might depart. This, sadly, has happened more than a few times.

I might take my leave if I feel like my personality will clash too much with other players. If I'm going to become the thorn in their side then I find it easier to just go somewhere else rather than risk ruining the fun for everybody else.

As far as I can tell, the majority of people who respond to an interest check will never make a second comment once the game goes live. I can accept that. I don't like it. Oh well.

This is less of a thing that scares me off and more of a gripe. I dislike when a potential GM finds a decent group and then just fades away. Depressing stuff, that.

Character Sheets: Where do you stand?

Character sheets are important if they are important to the game. I find it nice to check out who is playing and what they're like and it has proven to be an easy reference point to help with fleshing out a post. If there are going to be character sheets, simple is best. If you're going to try and make me jump through a bunch of hoops with some complicated bullshit template or arbitrary pro/con crap then you can fuck right off.

Persistent Characters vs "One-and-Done" Characters

I’ll not pretend to understand mentality of people who describe legacy characters as somehow flawed or those who play them as inferior. To me, all that means is admitting an inability to adapt one’s own world view as well as the arrogance to declare anybody who disagrees with you as simply “wrong”. I could go so far as to describe the practice of discarding one’s characters after only one use as shallow and lazy, but that would only be me being spiteful.

Legacy characters gain the benefit of being established and better developed than ones made up on-the-spot. More love and heart can go into a creation that persists than a simple one-off who will be forgotten in a year but I digress.

The simple fact is that both one-offs and legacy characters have merit. Any GM can tell you all about that. Arbitrarily condemning one or the other is a sign of weakness on the part of he accuser. However, preferring one or the other is simple opinion. I enjoy a mix of the two as a GM and, in fact, find the “disposable” one-shots essential for the random NPCs that don’t really matter. A few, even, have gone on to become fleshed out and beloved additions to the party.

A Fantasy Adventure Focusing on Story and Backed by a Dash of Dice

You both have good points. If I put it in TT then people might come looking for a dice-focused game. If I put it in the others, then people might be put off by the presence of dice at all.

I’ll think on this and listen to any argument you all want to offer. I don’t know how many people are willing to commit to this but the feedback seems promising!

A Fantasy Adventure Focusing on Story and Backed by a Dash of Dice

Things are looking pretty good. I won't have much time during this week to do anything more than answer questions and get to know you fine writers. I *should* have Friday off so I think I'll go ahead and start putting everything together.

I do have a question for anybody who is interested, though. I'm trying to figure out which subforum to put this in. I'm leaning toward Tabletop for the obvious reasons. However, I'm also considering putting this in Casual because fuck the system. By definition, however, it seems more suited for Advanced.

So, my question to you is, where do YOU want me to put this role play?

(D&D 5E) The Tyranny of Dragons - Closed

I can put something together for this.

All of the games I have played were homebrew and I am fairly new to 5e. I might have a lot of questions about the greater D&D world.

My Steel, My Skills, My Wisdom Are Yours If You Need Them

@CollectorOfMyst I will do that. Thank you for the invitation.