Close Topic Options

Playing Rpgs Risky Or Safe?

I've been playing in this community awhile now. Maybe not as long as some of the others but long enough to get a general feel for most here and I'm noticing that there are basically two kinds of players... You have one some players pushing their character really out there and then there are the ones who play it safe not really stirring anything but there for support. I find myself more as a safe player allowing others to take the lead but kind of dropping my hand when I see things getting crazy. Just looking for some thoughts on types of playing.

Safe Risky Rpgs Playing

You are correct. Many styles of players out there but two types really. Ones that will take all the risks and usually get killed but learn from it and play a bit smarter the ext time. And those that will play in the back ground in hopes their character survives long enough to really make a name for themselves. I like to take a few risks and get my characters more fame that way.

Playing Rpgs Risky Or Safe? Reviews RPG & Card Board

I think there are obviously as many types of players as there are people, or at least psychological models, but to me, there seem to be the Natural Leaders (if the player is brash, ready to kick open door after door, braving crossbow bolts to the chest), the Reluctant Heroes (occasionally the sidekick but often that role is relegated to the Supporter), the Loners, the Wildcards, the Supporters and the Opportunists.


Probably the two you're referring to would be the Natural Leaders and the Supporters, with some shadows of each in between. Like for me, I'm normally probably a reluctant hero or supportive follower in my characters, occasionally a wildcard, but try to play a little of each, even if I don't like it or am bad at it.


I think each have their place and it is possible to run a feasible party with any combination of as many or few of any of these as you have, but the more "biased" toward one type, the more consideration has to be given to how to even that out so as to not have significant deficits in unfilled needed skills, and of course it all depends on the temperaments of the group overall. As Will Rogers once said, "Everybody can't be a hero, someone has to sit on the curb and cheer as they go by."


Although it's a joke typology, I'm partial to the following, which lists the four basic joke player types (I've actually seen a really good large list of sensible types but this is for fun), and among other things, shows how they think about the other types. So REAL MEN: think other *Real Men* are brothers in arms, etc. I got this from a subsite of facetieux.free.fr, just so I'm crediting the site and not plagiarizing it. I've played with or ran for each of these also.

REAL MEN:
*Real Men* think they're brothers in arms.
*Real Roleplayers* hide behind them.
*Loonies* harass them with stupid suggestions.
*Munchkins* say ``I'm a Real Man, too!''

REAL ROLEPLAYERS:
*Real Men* protect them, on the off chance they may come up with
something useful.
*Real Roleplayers* sigh with relief to know they're not alone,
and then get their characters involved in love affairs
and death feuds.
*Loonies* harass them with stupid suggestions.
*Munchkins* say ``I'm a Real Roleplayer, too!''

LOONIES:
*Real Men* ignore them.
*Real Roleplayers* sometimes harass them back by taking a
stupid suggestion and making it work.
*Loonies* declare a pie fight at 20 paces . . . And cheat.
*Munchkins* try to imitate the jokes, and fall flat.

MUNCHKINS:
*Real Men* attack them on sight.
*Real Roleplayers* trick them into being cannon fodder.
*Loonies* make reasonable-sounding suggestions that will get
the Munchkin killed in an amusing way.
*Munchkins* query, ``What's a Munchkin?''

Safe Risky Rpgs Playing

Obviously Oliron is not the type to sit back and do nothing. I suppose I am the latter, one who plays by pushing the scenes boundaries. No offense to anyone, at times I too find it better to play from the background. However I feel if you are going to play a background character all the time, you could easily be an NPC.

I could draw up a campaign and run threw it as a pile of numbers and words, and have fun. Yet, it is the person who breathes life into their character that breathes life into the campaign. I suppose you could play a background character and still bring life to the story. Many of the more memorable characters in stories are the ones who say and do little. Yet, when the time comes though they steal the scene.

Safe Risky Rpgs Playing

Well I feel that it matters the situation, and the character/class's strengths, weakness, personality. I, as an example, have played both sides of the spectrum and everything in between. But considering Lionel's character and class strengths I will always play him to be more careful in a battle or combat situation. But Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom based situations I will play him as more confident, and willing to take risks. Also I always try to at least consider the risks, if not also plan for them.

Edited: Thomaslee on 24th Feb, 2010 - 4:12pm

Playing Rpgs Risky Or Safe?

I personally see a large variety of characters. I'll list off some of the more common ones here.

The Aggressor. That guy or gal that attacks first, and assumes everyone is an enemy. Watch these ones, they have a knack for advancing plot, but can at times send the plot spiraling into uncharted territory. Fun campaigns, but rough on the DM, and most DMs will simply face you with impossible situations to force you to flee back on track.

The Sense of Reason. The guy or gal that attacks last, and never jumps to conclusions. A staple of any campaign, but more than one and they both seem redundant.

The Quirk. The X-factor, you never know what the Quirk will do, but rest assured it'll end badly. Makes for a fun, but short-lived campaign.

The Statue. Never does anything until a fight starts, and then they end it with a decisive blow. Useful, but having too many makes a campaign boring.

The Question. Never makes any decisions as to what the party does, and does their best to stop the party from making any decision without knowing 100% of the information. One of these is bearable if he's weak enough that he can be ignored. Watch out for a strong one though, or he'll stall the campaign.

The Grief. Similar to the question, but rather than halting the party from advancing, the grief constantly attempts to leave the DM's planned track and take the campaign into unknown areas. Often responsible for getting the party killed. Not to be mistaken for an aggressor.

The Disease. Plain and simple the disease is the character who is trying to get everyone killed, often by being the strongest character, and simply killing them off manually one-by-one. Telltale signs are when someone is always identifying griefs, questions, and quirks as negative players who should be killed off. Turn on this guy mid-battle. Color spray him and then flee. He is not an ally you want to keep around.




I personally tend to play aggressors and quirks. Though Ryorst is a blend of Statue and Quirk. I was in another campaign where everyone was a question, except I was a quirk. I managed to drag the campaign for a while by myself, then I ended up turning a few of them from questions to diseases, and I ended up becoming an aggressor. I got killed off.

Playing Rpgs Risky Safe

So Rentok what kind of character would you call Lionel, I would suggest reading a few of my past posts, how he has handled passed situations, and possibly Lionel's back story.

Edited: Thomaslee on 25th Feb, 2010 - 2:45am

Playing Rpgs Risky Safe Board Card & RPG Reviews

I would rate Lionel as a cryptic champion. Much like my own character he desires to right wrongs. To leave behind a better world than the one he was brought into. Yet the world has ways of twisting such desires.

Tales of a destroyed kingdom and murdered family drive his search for greatness. A misplaced sister being the jewel of his adventure. However I think Lionel is still a child in many ways as is Oliron. They both have to come face to face yet, with the true past of their situations. The actual meat of what brought about the events that led them to this point.

Lionel believes his family to be innocent in that they were murdered. Yet what are the undercurrents that decide the actions of the world. Meaning, we think one way but when all the facts are assembled there is no white and black only shades of gray. Lionel may be in for a surprise while uncovering his families past, is he ready for such a revelation.