Friendship is Dragons
Updates Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays
Page 703 - Dust Daredevil
Author Notes:
(Pop-out)
36 Comments:
The title says it all.
Do you have any daredevils in your group?
It could be the player or the character.
Do you have any daredevils in your group?
It could be the player or the character.
In a game of Mouse Guard, I played a reckless fellow. In a fight against an owl, I scurried up a tree and attempted to drop onto the mighty beast in the hopes of either taming or at least being in a position to do it some real harm.
The GM made it very clear that this was a potentially fatal action, but, y'know, I took reckless as a trait, so it was game on.
Suffice to say that fortune favors the bold......
The GM made it very clear that this was a potentially fatal action, but, y'know, I took reckless as a trait, so it was game on.
Suffice to say that fortune favors the bold......
Ah, yes... One of my favourite Hunter: The Vigil characters, a great white hunter who happened to a)Be basically the embodiment of big game hunters from late XIXth/Early XXth century fiction and b) could do anything to just prove that he (And by extention human race) can. Once upon a time, when the Cell was assaulted by a bunch of werewolfs in a mansion of our richerN NPC associate(Also a monster hunter) and got trapped in the armory with some of them. So he figured: "WHat the hell, might as well go all-out on them"... What proceeded I leave to your imagination, saying only that he needed to be hospitalized for a larger timespan afterwards.
Nira Tyr - leapt into an area where a giant eldritch abomination's power was strongest because that meant her attacks against it would be similarly more powerful
Cassius Craine-Tyr - one of Nira's kids from an alternate timeline/universe, pretty much inherited all his mom's impulsiveness, refuses to back off even when clearly outnumbered and surrounded
Letitia Palmer - first reaction to seeing a giant robot attacking a city was "let's fight it"
Other people's characters:
Shaun Reely - will do anything FOR SCIENCE! including releasing several potentially-dangerous specimens from a lab, has no sense of danger when confronted with anything that fascinates him scientifically
Ryouta Kai - solution to everything is "punch it"
Luke Collins - very bad at thinking things through, jumped onto a moving train once (technically we all did, but the rest of us tried to slow it down first)
People who are either crazy or not thinking their moves carefully, all the time.
Every so often I end up with a character that's very hard to kill. High AC, saves, lots of escape powers (in 4e), or just plain lucky. I always make sure to milk it for all it's worth. n.n
This sometimes ends up with the overpowered character needing to be rescued by the rest of the party. o.o; But when it doesn't it's awesome! n.n
This sometimes ends up with the overpowered character needing to be rescued by the rest of the party. o.o; But when it doesn't it's awesome! n.n
I once had a princess, based on a Dragoon from Final Fantasy - i.e., she had a lot of "jump high and land on the enemy" attacks - do a fair imitation of a parkouring superball. She would slide down walls and jump up to roofs like it was nothing (because, to her, it was). This gave her a similar lack of fear she took to the other challenges they faced. The rest of the party was arguably the princess's bodyguards, sometimes guarding her from herself.
In the current modified 1st ed AD&D game I'm in, one of our party members is slightly obsessed with picking fights and setting everything on fire. Fire arrows, flasks of oil poured on the floor to set a trap and lit on fire, and just recently set fire to a bunch of dressers and other furniture to throw down a set of stairs at some owlbears. This is after of course after said player wanted to chase them down and bring the fight to them.
The character's small size—or the player's—might factor into this causation.
Suffice it to say, the tiny little fox-morph (yes, we're one of those weird groups) often has to be picked up and restrained by my 7'2" barbarian.
The character's small size—or the player's—might factor into this causation.
Suffice it to say, the tiny little fox-morph (yes, we're one of those weird groups) often has to be picked up and restrained by my 7'2" barbarian.
I usually run chaotic neutral characters with a hint of depression, so more often than not they attempt stupid stunts, to varying effect.
The worst plan that worked involved my Dwarven Defender spending all of his gold to buy enchanted climbing gloves; he then stole the rouges grappling hook, and climbed up a castle wall all the way up to one of the towers. He anchored the hook, then used his heavy armored body as a wrecking ball to swing into the throne room's stained windows, and land on the king. By the time the guards arrived, he climbed back onto the tower and whistled away.
The worst plan that worked involved my Dwarven Defender spending all of his gold to buy enchanted climbing gloves; he then stole the rouges grappling hook, and climbed up a castle wall all the way up to one of the towers. He anchored the hook, then used his heavy armored body as a wrecking ball to swing into the throne room's stained windows, and land on the king. By the time the guards arrived, he climbed back onto the tower and whistled away.
To be fair he had a vorpal sword and couldn't reach me with it while I was on his back.
For instance, one of the rogues in a past D&D campaign was always looking to make money and spend it all on booze and whatever suited his fancy at the moment. He was very much that "free spirit" definition of Chaotic Neutral. When the party found a Holy Avenger sword among a dragon's treasure, he suddenly took up Paladin on his level up and championed to be an example for the party.
THAT was an OOC moment. The rogue never aspired to better himself before, never thought to do more good than bad before, never hinted at all that he wanted to change his care-free low-responsibility life.
OOC does not however mean bad writing or bad story. If there's a reason (however bizarre) and/or it's entertaining, it can work. The latter works better in role play though.
As a fanfiction reader and writer, I have gotten used to the use of OOC to mean "out of character for any reason". And some people equate out of character to equal bad writing. You know; even when things like emotional distress and teenage hormones are involved.
Maybe that sword was enchanted??? A specialized "Need Me, Want Me" spell targetted at knaves?
The rogue's player however, rolled a 1 it would seem. He rarely invested points into UMD.
Imagine AJ's player returning to the group to learn that the GM killed her character...
"Okay, we are going to pretend that critical failure never happened and AJ was not crushed by the train. Everyone gets extra XP to keep their mouths shut."
I once had a DM that rolled awesome dices for NPCs and shitty dices for ennemies.
So once, during an entire session we kinda did the roleplay and watched as our two minions litterally slayed all that he throw at us. It's kinda funny to see the DM becoming mentally ill and talking to himself XD.
So if it is the same, AJ would be fine.
So once, during an entire session we kinda did the roleplay and watched as our two minions litterally slayed all that he throw at us. It's kinda funny to see the DM becoming mentally ill and talking to himself XD.
So if it is the same, AJ would be fine.
I think that AJ's player keeps her OoC and her IC awareness nested neatly with each other. She would be thinking, 'Did they fall off? They'll be fine. I bet if I can outrun this train, I get some bonus experience points!'
I do find it highly amusing that the most Out of Character episode for Applejack is her being NPCed by the DM. XD
An extended period where a character or person isn't acting like themselves is often a sign something is wrong.
Yes, that person is a synth
And I'm not a shapeshifter....
And I'm not a shapeshifter....
Because I'm pretty sure what my character is doing. I've been hand-waving it has suffering from severe, untreated PTSD, and still being in that same stressful environment. But I'm not sure that's how PTSD individuals would actually act
Well, because we were bored of doing investigation, we took a boat to the island where the monster live.
But then we remembered that we forgot to bring enough food, that night was falling and that the monster was a manticore. I can't tell you what happen next cause it will be wednesday. ;)
(I expect at least two dead)
But then we remembered that we forgot to bring enough food, that night was falling and that the monster was a manticore. I can't tell you what happen next cause it will be wednesday. ;)
(I expect at least two dead)
So as of now this whole session has become a great deal more relvant for me.
See, my second campaign is a Pathfinder one, in which I play a Tiefling Sorcerer with the Draconic (Red) Bloodline (surprise, no Infernal/Abyssal). Due to how I rolled and set up his stats, I ended up with a solid +2 in everything except Constitution (+1). But after making a bunch of other character sheets for one, I became dissatisfied with how generalist my Sorcerer was in comparison. So with no expectation of getting to use it in the same campaign I made a 2.0 version of the sorcerer, with more varied and specialized stats.
However the campaign is now picking back up, and the DM has given me an offer: I can use the 2.0 sheet I made, but in exchange I have to use the Wildblooded class archetype, meaning I use the Linnorm mutation for my bloodline. He tells me it's because it'll make me more distinct from a new player's character (coming in to replace a friend who's been deployed in the Navy) who's also going to be a Sorcerer, and because he can use it for story.
Now the DM is a long-time friend; trust is a non-issue here. But as tempting as the deal is, I'm just not sure, since it's the GM making this decision for story plots I know nothing about, and my character is to be completely unaware that he has the Linnorm mutation. Should I take him up on it?
See, my second campaign is a Pathfinder one, in which I play a Tiefling Sorcerer with the Draconic (Red) Bloodline (surprise, no Infernal/Abyssal). Due to how I rolled and set up his stats, I ended up with a solid +2 in everything except Constitution (+1). But after making a bunch of other character sheets for one, I became dissatisfied with how generalist my Sorcerer was in comparison. So with no expectation of getting to use it in the same campaign I made a 2.0 version of the sorcerer, with more varied and specialized stats.
However the campaign is now picking back up, and the DM has given me an offer: I can use the 2.0 sheet I made, but in exchange I have to use the Wildblooded class archetype, meaning I use the Linnorm mutation for my bloodline. He tells me it's because it'll make me more distinct from a new player's character (coming in to replace a friend who's been deployed in the Navy) who's also going to be a Sorcerer, and because he can use it for story.
Now the DM is a long-time friend; trust is a non-issue here. But as tempting as the deal is, I'm just not sure, since it's the GM making this decision for story plots I know nothing about, and my character is to be completely unaware that he has the Linnorm mutation. Should I take him up on it?
But that's just me. In some cases. And really, arguing over the behavior of fictional characters... How you say, the winning move is not to play.
We've finally got some more Fallout is Dragons!
Session 52 - Mobile Headquarters: Libsyn YouTube