is it a dick move to not get involved in the plot hook if your character legitimately wouldn't? Like, your character legitimately either gives no fucks or would not want to get involved in-character?
Is it a wise move to create a character whose personality dictates they give no fucks, ultimately screwing them out of loot and experience? Sounds a bit meta, but not taking jobs or requests is kinda shooting yourself in the foot. Plus, if you have a party, and you decide not to go with them because of your character's indifference, that's just another drawback.
Why are you playing that character?
Why are you choosing to show up to a group game specifically to not be part of that group?
Why do you think anyone should have to put up with your time-wasting bullshit?
>>45787934
Now is this a main plotline plothook or is this a "GM got drunk and had an amazing idea" sidequest plothook?
>>45788128
>Is it a wise move to create a character whose personality dictates they give no fucks, ultimately screwing them out of loot and experience?
Yes
>>45788149
>Why are you playing a character with their own interests and motivations which may not always converge with those of the wider party?
>Why are you roleplaying while roleplaying?
>Why aren't you being meta-as-fuck?
Ignore those two guys OP, but this is admittedly a more important question
>>45788251
>>45788251
As a GM, this is my entire everything.
OP, why not discuss it with your GM and have a plot hook that suits your character? Sometimes it's better to shut up than go along with it, especially if the hook suits someone else or if it's bad role-playing to go along with it.
Shit, the amount of riddles I've known the answer to but I chose to play the 7 INT orc? Damn satisfying I kept my trap shut.
>>45788251
It is the main.
It's not that my character gives no fucks, but my character's interests apply loosely at best to the theme's he's chosen for the adventure.
I could make him give a fuck, but I would have to make him give a fuck; come up with a reason on the fly.
>>45787934
I had a character like that once. I had a game that was advertised as a more "slice-of-life create stuff to flesh out the custom setting". I made a mad scientist alchemist who spent most of her free time fleshcrafting and making money for fleshcrafting projects.
Our DM then started throwing us side missions. At first I thought it was just a bit of diversion, give us something else to do for a while. Then, eventually, we get a puzzle to solve that leads us on a bit of a treasure hunt. "Okay, this isn't too bad" I thought to myself. I was wrong.
The treasure hunt was organized by a BBEG, and led to a chamber sealing the blood of a dead god. And so our party turns from craftsmen to adventurers. But my alchemist wanted nothing to do with this. Finally, after multiple emotional breakdowns, she decides enough is enough and leaves, going back home to resume her work and let the adventurers deal with adventuring.
>>45788476
>but my character's interests apply loosely at best to the theme's he's chosen for the adventure.
You are a shit player.
/tg/ will praise you for being "special and unique".
This thread is shit.
>>45788291
>Why are you showing up to a game and refusing to play with the other players?
>>45788546
it's not like I knew what the story was going to be about while I was making my character
>>45787934
Not always. In a single player or smaller party, the problem is most likely a lack of communication, either the players have made characters that don't fit the setting/intended feel of the game (IE Murder hobos in a political game) or bad GMing.
In a larger party or huge games like LARPs, being more/less invested in individual hooks is to be expected and has sometimes lead to some good RP. Characters I've had in the past have done little, or otherwise worked against the party because of general apathy towards the problem or an investment in seeing it fail. Recently at my LARP, I sabotaged a formal magic spell casting that was being defended by the entire town (about 30+ people), killing the caster, and setting back the fixing of the problem until next month, solely because my character wasn't done researching the broke-ass elemental portal they were trying to fix, yet.
Of course, IN GAME, it will always be a dick move, though.
>>45788128
Not every peasant and king's problem is going to concern every character, and it's not always a matter of giving a fuck. Bad GMing, large or diverse parties, andoriginal character ideascan lead to plot hooks that don't quite matter as much as intended.
>>45788549
That's not necessarily true though. Skipping one plot hook is pretty irrelevant unless you're a 0/10 player. There's other stuff he can do, if it's short he can just chill for a while, or he could skip the session. Or does he have to maintain 100% meta awareness at all times and do everything to be as fun/party-interest-advancing as possible?
>>45787934
Kind of, but mostly because your character, as an extension of you, should be flexible enough to get involved in the game's plot. I'm sympathetic to wanting to keep your character in character, but remember that RPG characters are almost by definition adventurers or investigators.
This is another reason why the first time the group gets together should be dedicated to character creation, so that the GM can take these things into account and you can collaborate to make a workable party.
>>45788588
>I run away from the party and hide in the woods.
>I refuse to go along with the party and decide to sit in this in-game bar for the next 4 out-of-game hours doing nothing.
>I want to go on my own special little side quest that'll take up an hour of everyone else's time while they can't do anything in-game because I'm an entitled little shithead.
This is what inevitably happens when you have a lone wolf in a group game.
>>45787934
As a DM i hate this kind of characters some time. I mean thei MIGHT add some fun/twists to the story... but more often than that, they are just a dead weight to the plot, and a waste of time for the whole group.
>>45788572
>it's not like I knew what the story was going to be about while I was making my character
1. Your DM is shit.
2. You're still shit for not asking.
3. You will never be not shit, stop being defensive and making excuses.
>>45788648
A good GM would handle that appropriately, right? Bring in the other characters, or have them do something at the same time.
>>45788588
>or he could skip the session.
Please do. And then please don't come back, because the game runs much more smoothly without you.
>>45788648
So much fucking this. It just force the DM to strong arm the character in order to stick him to the rest of the group/story.
>>45788674
Yeah. But as we all know that 95% of anything is shit, so 95% of the time this situation is run by a Nad GM who will either reasonably railroad them back into the party or will ways everyone's time catering to the one person.
>>45788549
Because he has to have all attentions on his special snowflake. The game isn't about the group, it's just about him.
>>45788546
Dude, no, pretty sure we're all shitting on his terrible communication skills.
If he wants to have Character the Fanfic written about his PC instead of playing with the others, he can go write it himself.
>>45788682
Literally the only thing you know about OP is that he is significantly invested into RPing and not being a powergaming metafag.
>>45788648
He only mentioned doing it once. I think you are projecting past That Guy experiences onto OP. He seems reasonable, he even came here to ask us if he was being a dick. If he was the sort to ruin every game he wouldn't bother asking.
>>45788674
I see only three options for a GM in that situation:
1. Have the lone wolf player sit out the session. That's boring for them.
2. Alternate GMing the main plot for the group with some ad-hoc side plot for the lone wolf. That's frustrating for the GM, and maybe for the players.
3. Create a way to make the main plot matter to the lone wolf. No matter how dressed up it is, that's railroading, not to mention extra work for the GM.
>>45788812
>Literally the only thing you know about OP is that he is significantly invested into RPing and not being a powergaming metafag.
Except that's not true. We know he's a faggot, we know he didn't know or care what the campaign was going to be about, nor did he care enough to ask, and he is here looking for praise on his choice to not be a part of his gaming group, while still showing up and wasting their time specifically because it's "What his character would do". And we know he loves semen.
>>45788740
Nah, you just run into enemies that understand teamwork and how it's a force multiplier so you get flanked, suppressed, stun locked, and wrecked unless you roll crazy good.
Because I don't have all fucking session for you to Batman around.
Stull, if it was a one off separation 1v1 I would plan it out in advance with the player so as not to screw the other guys. But we're a pretty social group who plays in person so it's not really an issue when it does happen.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this sort of thing CAN be handled well, just that OP is going about it in the wrong way to the point I think it's bait.
>>45788843
That's an awful lot of projection you've got going on there, mr. angry shitposter. You didn't even read the thread since he specifically said he did ask what the campaign would be about and made his character to be interested in it, which the DM then seems to have abandoned.
>>45788887
Why are you here? Why are you spending all thread throating OP's cock and defending him?
No one agrees with you. You're alone in defending shit player actions.
>>45788812
> Significantly interested in RPing
> Is unable to create a character that has a reason to work with the group
Pick ONE. Being a good role player isn't the same as living out your OC Donut steel on the tabletop.
>>45788918
Do you really think it isn't OP baiting the thread?
> MeBarryMe.jpg
>>45787934
To be honest, I think it's selfish to the rest of the party and to the GM. If you're doing a political campaign then it might be a little different, but you're kind of asking that the GM singles your character out and creates content just for you. And the GM is going to feel like they're spending too much time on you and not the rest of the party.
That being said, talk to your GM and figure it out.
>>45788918
Because you're all being unreasonable in my opinion. Why are you spending all thread shitting on OP if everyone agrees with you? We're on a Malaysian water monitoring BBS so I don't really see your point.
>>45788937
I'm not OP though m80
>>45788922
This is one (1) plot hook in a campaign, if you can't imagine a situation where a character who is otherwise motivated to work with a group temporarily is not you are not even fucking trying
>>45789087
>I'm not OP though m80
OP please just delete your thread.
>>45789087
>Why are you spending all thread shitting on OP if everyone agrees with you? We're on a Malaysian water monitoring BBS so I don't really see your point.
Lurk more redditfag. If you don't understand how we can enjoy our anger, then you haven't been here long enough.
>>45788990
What do you mean by it would be okay in a political game? That sounds like it's leading to wither PvP or proxying through henchmen while the PC is more of a figurehead?
>>45789254
>That sounds like it's leading to wither PvP or proxying through henchmen while the PC is more of a figurehead?
A little bit of that and more actually. It's expected that the players show more independence and initiative for those kinds of campaigns, otherwise they don't work as well.
My favorite was when my friend joined a game I was in, my character was very resourceful & wealthy so he installed her as head of her own brothel which turned out to be a great spy network to pick up on the vice and weaknesses of his enemies or whoever else may have been noteworthy enough to blackmail or gather information on.
>>45789254
I've been here (4chan, not /tg/) since the pool closed, you fucking newfag. This isn't /b/, though, and it's one thing to enjoy anger and another to shitpost "OP is a cum guzzling faggot" ten times in a row.
>>45789478
Hey me too. Remember how instead of how we now blame everything on SJW's and Tumblr, we used to blame /b/ for it all?
>>45789478
Well stop being a cum guzzling faggot, admit you need to change your stupid character concept, and move the Fuck on with life.
Or try to join our discussion >>45789436
About how political games work at least.
Or kill yourself.
> Getting upset at being called a Newfag
It's the best way to tell you really are a Newfag.
>>45789436
Yeah, but your party is still working together for mutual benefit, just at a distance it seems.
>>45787934
If your character is not engaged by the plot hook, there's two probable reasons for it. Either the DM is bad at understanding you and knowing what you/your character would go for, or you created a character at odds with the rest of the party.
If it's the first, then you're not likely to get a first-class experience anyway, so do whatever you please. Either stay in character or don't. It's up to you.
If it's the second option, then you probably screwed up, and it's up to you to fix the problem. Find a reason to go along and do some patch-up character-development. Maybe talk to the DM and work on a character arc to bring you more in-line with the rest of the party.
>>45788476
Thus is more of a problem of both you and your GM not communicating. He doesn't need to tell you the whole plot, but he should at least give you the main hook so you can create a character who would respond to said hook.
I wouldn't say you're wholly at fault, but both of you should be more flexible. Suggest him working your backstory into the main plot somehow or tweak your character a bit to make him less of a disaffected loner.
>>45789533
>Well stop being a cum guzzling faggot, admit you need to change your stupid character concept, and move the Fuck on with life.
I'm not OP though, you double nigger.
>if you reply, you're upset
This is funny coming from the guy who just said he's getting mad for the lulz.
>>45787934
If it hooks one of your party, you have a reason to get involved. If it doesn't hook a single member of your party, it's a shitty as fuck hook and the party has explicitly passed on it for good reason.
>>45787934
Consider the following. I took part in a Vampire: the Requiem game once where it was an alternate future timeline of the player's real lives, just one year in advance. The game turned out great. Exactly the self-loathing curb-stomping humanity-draining philosophical deadpan that a Vampire game is so good at being.
Only if I had player "exactly myself" it never would have happened. If I ever became a vampire, I would chain myself int e sunlight until I died, because I'd never want to exist as a cursed soul who must drain others' blood to survive.
I wanted to play the game though, so instead of offing myself when I got turned in session one (which was very unexpected by the way), I decided out of character to play along and pretend I didn't do what I would do.
tl;dr - sometimes you do things that are not in character for the sake of playing the game.
>>45788918
I agree with him, do you feel better now anon?
>>45789815
>because I'd never want to exist as a cursed soul who must drain others' blood to survive.
You won't know until you try.
>>45788546
>/tg/ will praise you for being "special and unique".
Nobody is being praised for being special and unique anymore. 4chan is reactionary to the current (perceived) mainstream zeitgeist. Hence, people here longing for either in-your-face authoritarianism (because the current one is apparently too subtle) or right-wing anarchism.
The 4chan hivemind hates people who don't conform.
>>45787934
It depends on what the plot hook is and what the character is like.
If it's "the orphans have gone missing, the king's guard captain thinks you're capable of doing something about it" then yeah, it's a pretty douche play to not want to help. I mean doing a job like that has a chance to land a solid with the law, even an evil character would give it a shot.
If it's "death cult #51837 are murdering criminals to appease their obscure eldritch god" then it's understandable for a character to lack fucks to give. That shit's magic, and a lot of characters don't wanna fuck with magic, let alone possible-deity magic.On a side note: Don't make a character that isn't down for getting dirty. When opening session gets a moment like "We have Anon, Anonis, and Anonette in the party, now to rope in Anoner.", stays at the inn because "My character doesn't really feel like joining a group for exploring is in his best interest.", all you're doing is slowing the game down.
>>45787934
It's an unwritten rule of writing and gaming that, at some point, you have to make a character that's interested in adventuring.
It's well and good if the plot hook is legitimately not interesting, but ask yourself why that is. Did you make a character with a very specific or bizarre set of interests? Is the plot hook out there and weirdly bizarre?
Or are you That Guy, and you made a character that just has on reason to get involved in... anything, really.
I've seen too many people trying to play 'against the grain' characters, people with specific interests, ties to specific communities - A chef who wants to run a business, or an investment lawyer who wants to make money, that sort of thing. It's really bad in modern-day settings, where the tropes aren't as well-known or enforced.
At the beginning of the day, you've just got to say, "How do I make this character interested in adventuring instead of just staying home?" Adventuring is a strange and bizarre choice in a lot of settings, the pay is often poor until you get really good at it and the danger is off the charts. But, if you don't make someone who is an adventurer?
There is no game.
Please, for the sake of newbie GM's, old GM's who just want to have fun, or even the good of the whole group, just make a character who wants to adventure without needing to jump through hoops of logic and treasure.
I dont care what you drag up as a pc if it fits the guidelines I set for character creation and that it fits the theme of the campaign we agreed upon before the first session.
I also require that your character has a reason for doing what they do at campaign start and how they fit in to the setting or party, depending on how we start.
>>45789815
>implying you can't just go to the blood bank every few nights
>implying blood drives aren't vampire pyramid schemes to have a willing, constant food supply
>>45791746
I totally agree with everything you've said. PLayers signed a contract the moment they agreed to be in the game and they should create characters that fit the game's needs while fulfilling whatever it is that counts for fun on the player's side of thing.
HOWEVER. When the GM decides to take one too many left turns and you and your character is left making choices no sane man/woman/monster would be making, it is up to the player to tell the GM, "This is not what I signed up for."
>>45787934
Yes. Ultimately, you are playing a cooperative game with other people. If your character doesn't want to take part in it, you're not taking part in it, so you'd better just go along with it anyways, or you're disrupting the game.
No, it's totally legit
Character motivation is one of the main factors of the good story. Unless you play shitty D&D and are into "adventuring adventurers having adventures in da dungeonz" crap.
It's a dick, or at least lazy move for the dm to create plot hook that isn't somehow revelant for ALL PCs
UNLESS GM specifically stated that he needs certain type of characters for this campaign, and you ignored it, then you're the dick.
>>45787934
you just do you
worst case, the DM send in the zombies and everyone has to work together to survive.
(true worst case: the DM doesnt try)
>>45788648
>>I refuse to go along with the party and decide to sit in this in-game bar for the next 4 out-of-game hours doing nothing.
Fucking this, man. Everyone else in my group came together and made characters with backstories and motivations, except TG decided he wants to do nothing but drink and do shit damage. Didn't even read the setting info.
