Started by Kyle Van Pelt, November 04, 2011, 12:16:31 PM
Quote from: contracycle on November 04, 2011, 02:45:49 PMThe only suggestion I might offer is that it might be worthwhile not putting too much effort into fixing this character; maybe it would be worth continuing to play it as is while a new idea simmers. A clean break might be better in the long run than trying to fix thid one. Or not - up to you.
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on November 04, 2011, 04:31:32 PMHow would you describe the GM'ing style of your Pathfinder GM, compared to your own GM'ing? What kind of scenes do you play in the PF group? How much "plot" do you cover in one session? How many sessions for a level-up? What aspects of the game do you dedicate a lot of attention to, at the table? When you say you're shying away from dialogue, how's the dialogue between the other players? Do you like it?
Quote from: Kyle Van Pelt on November 04, 2011, 06:52:34 PMif I did build a new character, this time I would build it while sitting next to the DM, so I could gain motivations and goals that intertwine with the plot.
Quote from: Kyle Van Pelt on November 04, 2011, 06:52:34 PM2. People's backstories kinda came outta nowhere, and I don't know how they happened to get brought up. During the first session, almost 30 minutes of play passed before I spoke up, saying, "So... what's everyone's names and what do you look like?" The DM clapped his hands and said, "IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEONE SAID IT," then everyone else started to give descriptions like "I look like a Fighter" and "I'm an elf who doesn't like humans". I was kinda shocked, since in my games I always started the session by giving the players not only a good reason to be in a party but to have a common ground. They also usually had a few minutes to explain who they were, what they looked like, and occasionally devise ways for their characters to know each other (like being adopted brothers or co-workers or schoolmates or something.)
QuoteThe dialogue isn't bad, and one guy in particular is an excellent roleplayer who seems to drive the party forward more than the rest. As people, the players and DM are all very nice and willing to help, so I don't feel alienated at all.
Quote from: David Berg on November 04, 2011, 08:26:26 PMWhen I'm trying to develop a character in a tactical game, one question I try to make sure I have a good answer to is, "Why is my character going on these dangerous quests?" By not stopping at an answer that's merely sufficient, and instead pushing for something that actually inspires me, I put myself in a better position to find meaning in all the ups and downs of the characters' endeavors.
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on November 05, 2011, 07:53:47 AMI guess the best you can make of it is to go for funny in-character banter, and embrace the tactical situations. Nobody expects you to give gripping character portrayals and resourceful creative input. Maybe you could come up with something that gives a little recognition value to your character.
Quote from: contracycle on November 05, 2011, 08:06:50 AMA thing I used to do, and which some other people adopted, was to start each session with a little vignette from each player about their character. Like those cuts you see at the beginning of a TV episode, whwere all the characters are shown doing something typical, and the actors name is shown, so everyone knows who they are. so on that model, people could use these little scenes to describve the character doing somethingthat was meaningful or representative about them. Perhaps your group could borrow that idea.
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on November 05, 2011, 04:57:22 PMHey Kyle, it occurred to me that the Pathfinder game is probably pretty straightforward but the more interesting question is what's up with all that "accommodating" DM style and those "sacrificed" NPCs. What do you think?
Quote from: Dithmer on November 05, 2011, 11:10:10 PMI think you may have had the same problem; You say that you have a problem getting into ONE character, after playing all the NPCs as a GM, and describe yourself as a "Chameleon" while GMing. What the problem seems to be is that, as a GM you pretty much have to be reactive to whatever the player does, in most circumstances. On the other hand, if you're a player, you have to give the GM something to work with, you have to be in an active role, or the GM feels that he needs to force things onto the PCS.