st_nougat:
I dont know about the other part of your rant but unfortunately this seems to be the norm around here
I've actually had decent luck with a couple of games thus far that have been going for a good long while now. Joined a good PF and 4e game right when I joined RPOL.
The other part is about specifically Pathfinder. To expound a bit, I am personally enthralled by the Advanced Race guide. Every now and again, I'll just sit and read and create fake characters after reading through a particular race. Then, I'll try to run those ideas in RTJ's for games that supposedly would be ok with the concept (checks out with their list of allowable books, races, traits, setting, etc.) only to find that the GM isn't actually ok with whatever I've come up with. I guess they don't fully realize some of the possibilities they say they're ok with but actually aren't? The usual reason being that it's very non-traditional and hard to fit into a regular party.
My favorite example of this was a Goblin Alchemist whose primary weapon for the first 5 levels of play was going to be a standard torch. There's a combination of traits, class features, and racial feats I could use to have it work about as effectively as a +1 Flaming Weapon. And it combined rather nicely with the usual Goblin love of arson. It was 1 part comedic, 1 part manic, and 3 parts deadly. It fit together quite nicely. I had decent stats (14, 18, 12, 13, 11, 8 I think?) for doing this, as well as a more standard array of skills to benefit a regular adventuring party.
This was submitted to 4 games with the same response, "Does it have to be a Goblin? Why not X race instead? I'd be more than happy to work with that." Ugh, this is honestly the laziest type of response I get a lot. It's not like I didn't outline my planned racial feats to make this work. Read that keyword:
RACIAL. I consistently make it a point that the idea is built around a racial archetype or feats, and I still get this lazy response of, "How about X race instead?"
...
quote:
One of three things is likely happening:
1 - The GM's story will not fit your concept
2- The GM isn't creative or energized enough to figure out a way to fit your concept
3 - Your concept would just simply break the genre/setting/overpower or otherwise mess the other PCs already in play.
I do want to take a second to address the first and third.
To the first, I have submitted concepts to games where it was far-fetched, but I usually try to make sure that it's at least in the realm of possibility for a given setting. For the above mentioned Alchemist, he was written multiple ways for various. Once, he was a Guild representative of a highly advanced society. Another time, he was a Underdark refugee that had been accidentally "rescued" by a Ranger. Yet another time, our Goblin was pyromaniac with a lust for vengeance against anything Orc. Lastly, he was written as an outcast with heavy investment into Disguise to try and pass himself as a sick Halfling while amongst civilized races. I really do try to do the work of making sure it's something not wholy unlikely for a given story or setting.
To the third, I guess that's a common misconception that I must be doing some powergaming concept if it involves an Uncommon Race. "What sinister OP/broken rule is
this guy going to try and abuse?" I try to avoid that by laying initial selections of archetypes and feats as well as the first few levels of probable selections, but I guess that particular stigma just clings to Uncommon Races moreso than anything else.
I guess I just have to keep trying. I'm at a point where playing yet another Core Race/Core Class game is just... uninteresting. Pathfinder did a lot to breathe life back into the Core for me, but it's still very familiar. After playing D&D for almost 20 years, you start to get the "been there, done that" syndrome pretty bad! Hence the biggest reason for trying to sell some of these harder concepts around.
This message was last edited by the user at 15:57, Wed 18 June 2014.