# "You're a half elf?  Really?"  From the P.A. Podcasts



## Hussar (Sep 13, 2009)

/rant mode on  


Just listened to the third episode of the latest Penny Arcade 4e podcast.  Funny stuff.

But, a ways into the 'cast, there's a bit of an aside where one player is shocked to learn that another character is a half elf.  ((Sorry, don't know who said what, but, that's the gist of it))  That sort of thing just flies straight up my left nostril.  As a player and a GM it just makes me grind my teeth.

I mean, hell, does anyone in this picture look like a half elf?  ((We already know Wheaton's playing the Eladrin)







And, the worst thing is, it's generally always bloody elf players that do it.

I don't understand why people play non-humans and then don't bother to play it up.  And, again, it's almost always the elf players.  Someone plays a dwarf?  No problem, grumpy drunk on demand.  Half-orc?  Not a worry, gotcha covered, crude big dumb dude coming up.  Halfling?  Sure, no worries - usually gets played up - trying to reach the top of the table, short arse jokes, head butts to the groin.  

Why is it that elves get played as humans that can see in the dark?

I'll give 4e props for at least making eladrin stand out.  That blink elf thing is just freaking cool.  Listening to Wil Weaton using his fey step, I can picture in my mind this sort of magical faerie being sliding in and out of reality to kick your ass.  Very unique.  At least it stands out.

But, third adventure in, and the other player doesn't even know that Omin Dran (thanks for the catch Tuxgeo) is a half elf.  Sigh.

Elf players, get in the game willya?


----------



## tuxgeo (Sep 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> /rant mode on
> 
> Just listened to the third episode of the latest Penny Arcade 4e podcast.  Funny stuff.
> 
> ...



IIRC, Jim is a Human Wizard. The first three players (Mike, Scott, Jerry*) are using pre-generated PCs from Keep on the Shadowfell; Jerry Holkins selected the half-elf cleric pre-gen, and chose to worship Avandra, who is all about freedom and traveling. I agree that it is difficult to see a half-elf in how Omin Dran is drawn; as I see it, only his light-colored hair and lack of mustache or beard reflect that racial background. 
Jim, on the other hand, is drawn with a goatee, which fairly clearly shows that he is human.
(* players listed in the order in which they _named_ their PCs)


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Why is it that elves get played as humans that can see in the dark?




Because most of the players who really enjoy roleplaying extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and ostentatious) beings are off playing Masquerade.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Sep 13, 2009)

Jim Darkmagic is a half elf? I would have never have guessed and obviously the person that entered his character in the CB does not know either as he is there as a human.

Not yet caught up with the podcasts thoough.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 13, 2009)

Sorry, my total bad.  Yes, NOT Jim Darkmagic.

I'll edit my original post.  Thanks for that.


----------



## Lhorgrim (Sep 13, 2009)

My experience has been that when someone plays a "stereotypical" dwarf, halfling, or half-orc; people pretty much accept it and support that play.

When someone plays an elf in the "stereotypical" fashion, there is a level of annoyance in other players that you don't often see with the other races.

I don't have search anymore, but I recall several threads on these boards over the years that decried the aloof, alien, or snotty characterization of elf PCs.

I'm sure there have been a few about "every" dwarf having a Scottish accent, or "all" halflings played as Kender, but the elf threads seemed more common to me.

I'm thinking of running an elf fighter with a battle axe who is consumed with greed for gold and gems, drinks ale like a fish, and speaks with a Scottish accent to see if it makes a difference in how the characterization is accepted by my group.


----------



## King Nate (Sep 13, 2009)

Also during the podcast one player (I can’t remember who) says they are taking an Attack of Opportunity instead of an Opportunity Attack which means not only do they not know each other’s character but they don’t know which rules they are playing either.


----------



## Pseudonym (Sep 13, 2009)

wulf ratbane said:


> because most of the players who really enjoy roleplaying extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and pretentious) beings are off playing masquerade.




  That made my morning.


----------



## malraux (Sep 13, 2009)

If you are a half-elf, should you be all that different from full human, especially if you grew up around humans?


----------



## Cadfan (Sep 13, 2009)

King Nate said:


> Also during the podcast one player (I can’t remember who) says they are taking an Attack of Opportunity instead of an Opportunity Attack which means not only do they not know each other’s character but they don’t know which rules they are playing either.



I've got a level 14 character that got there the hard way.  And I still get that wrong.


----------



## Mercule (Sep 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I don't understand why people play non-humans and then don't bother to play it up.



Agreed.  IMO, if non-humans races are just going to be played a big, dumb humans or skinny humans with bows or short, tough humans, then just make them humans.  Of course, I prefer a human-centric game, so I generally figure the first question for a non-human character is "Why not a human?"



Cadfan said:


> I've got a level 14 character that got there the hard way.  And I still get that wrong.



We've got two players that don't read rules (seriously -- my wife loves to game and has played from 1e, but I don't think she's ever read even a paragraph of any PHB), one that hates random terminology changes, and one that forgets terms all the time.  I gave up.


----------



## SkidAce (Sep 13, 2009)

It's Omin that's a half elf.


----------



## Jack99 (Sep 13, 2009)

King Nate said:


> Also during the podcast one player (I can’t remember who) says they are taking an Attack of Opportunity instead of an Opportunity Attack which means not only do they not know each other’s character but they don’t know which rules they are playing either.




In my country, we would call that fly-fecking. As in dealing with very small and unimportant things. 

It does not say anything about the players. Other than the fact that they might have more important things to do than memorizing RPG rules.


----------



## Asmor (Sep 13, 2009)

We had an elf in my last campaign. It was never forgotten, as we made fun of him (in- and out-of-game) constantly.


----------



## MatthewJHanson (Sep 13, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> In my country, we would call that fly-fecking. As in dealing with very small and unimportant things.
> 
> It does not say anything about the players. Other than the fact that they might have more important things to do than memorizing RPG rules.




In the States we call it nit-picking and I completely agree.

He's only half an elf, and he quite easily could have been raised by humans. Omin probably doesn't look like an elf in the comics, because the guy drawing it did not know he was a half-elf.

More importantly D&D is about having fun. Mike, Jerry, Scott, and Will are obviously doing that. They're not going to come into your house and tell you how to play your half-elf, let Jerry play the way he wants.


----------



## Rechan (Sep 13, 2009)

Mercule said:


> Agreed.  IMO, if non-humans races are just going to be played a big, dumb humans or skinny humans with bows or short, tough humans, then just make them humans.



Because they want the mechanics of the non-human? 

I'm of the opinion that the more non-human, the better. I like me some alien characters (Thri-keen wanting to eat the fallen? Yay!) 

The problem though is that 90% of your non-humans can be PLAYED as a human. Big dumb aggressive half-orc? Big dumb aggressive human. Heavy drinking Scottish-accented dwarf? Heavy drinking scottish-accented human. Kender klepto? Most thieves I've ran into are klepto or annoying, so it's not race dependent. So what's the difference?

Ultimately, it comes down to this: the fantasy racial stereotypes are just subcategories of Human culture/behavior. Prime example are Dwarves, who are just Scottish/Norse. But that's also been a peeve of mine - that each non-human race has ONE culture, one stereotype, while Humans have an endless variety of them.


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Sep 13, 2009)

Pseudonym said:


> That made my morning.




Mine too. Because gamers making stupid stereotyping jokes about the players of other game systems will never be something i understand.


----------



## Rechan (Sep 13, 2009)

Keefe the Thief said:


> Mine too. Because gamers making stupid stereotyping jokes about the players of other game systems will never be something i understand.



Come on now.

The joke isn't at the expense of the players. It's a comment about vampires.

Because vampires ARE, by and large, presented as  "extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and pretentious)" beings.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Sep 13, 2009)

If you think that is bad listen to my lattest DCU (d6) superhero game.

We are running an alt earth with bits of our fav heros from all sources. The PCs threw togather a team. 1 Player described his character as based on static shock but older. The character is in his late 60's.

he described himself as bald, a few rinkles but still in good shape, then his coustume. then in game 5 another PC made an off color joke about...well color. Everyone stared at the charcter based o 'static' and he didn't know why anyone thought he would care he was brought up in a more racest time...so when I (the DM) said "We just figured since you were black..." ande he interupoted "WHAT!?!?!? I never said that"

5 games with everyon pictureing the old man static from JLA cartoons and him pitcureing some guy named Cole from a video game just older...


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 13, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Come on now.
> 
> The joke isn't at the expense of the players.




Aww, sure it was. 

Well... when you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that squeals is usually the one you hit.

But what do I know? I'm just a grumpy drunk.


----------



## Storminator (Sep 13, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> But what do I know? I'm just a grumpy drunk.




Dwarf...


----------



## Umbran (Sep 14, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Aww, sure it was.





So...

You realize that you're now _admitting_ to being willfully insulting.  You don't leave us a whole lot of wiggle room here, dude.  

Respect.  If you can't show it, please don't post.  Grumpy and drunk is a crappy excuse for treating fellow gamers poorly.


----------



## Wik (Sep 14, 2009)

Hunh.  I call them Attacks of Opportunity still.  

Guess I don't know the rules.  News to me.  

Onto the subject at hand... it happens, for some reason.  I think because there's very little that says "half-elf" that makes them different from humans, either mechanically or characteristically, unless the player makes a special effort.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 14, 2009)

malraux said:


> If you are a half-elf, should you be all that different from full human, especially if you grew up around humans?




Absolutely yes.  


This goes beyond simply a racial difference.  You are actually a different _species_ than your parents.  Assimilation is one thing, but, if you're a half-elf, or whatever, you actually don't think the same way as your adoptive culture.  You can't.  You are physiologically different.

So, play it up.  For example, in 3e, a half-elf ages at about 1/2 the rate of a human.  That's huge!  The half-elf's adoptive parents will likely die of old age long before the half elf is even all that old.  That, right there, should set you pretty far apart from being human.



MatthewJHanson said:


> In the States we call it nit-picking and I completely agree.
> 
> He's only half an elf, and he quite easily could have been raised by humans. Omin probably doesn't look like an elf in the comics, because the guy drawing it did not know he was a half-elf.




And you have no problem with the fact that one of the other players, into the third adventure, doesn't actually know that the other player's character isn't human?  That's a pretty big character element, I would think, to be completely hidden.



> More importantly D&D is about having fun. Mike, Jerry, Scott, and Will are obviously doing that. They're not going to come into your house and tell you how to play your half-elf, let Jerry play the way he wants.




Sigh.  So, we should never comment on play because it can only be a badwrongfun post?  Come on.

Sure, you are absolutely right.  He can play it however he wants.  But, you know what?  In all the time I've played D&D, I've seen this happen time and time again.  Almost always elves.  And, yes, it drives me up the wall.  

If you're going to play a non-human, it should come up EVERY SINGLE CHANCE you get.  This should be important.  Look at pretty much every TV show or novel you read where there are non-humans.  How many have you read or watched where the fact that Character X is different from everyone else is not brought up at least a little bit?  Whether it's Worf or the half-klingon woman in Star Trek and Voyager, or G'kar in B5, or Romy in Andromeda, or the former demon girl (Xander's girlfriend whose name I forget) in Buffy - pretty much every single story where you have a half whatever or a non-whatever, it's a big deal.


----------



## Rechan (Sep 14, 2009)

Is there even a stereotype for half-elves?


----------



## RefinedBean (Sep 14, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Is there even a stereotype for half-elves?




A human that doesn't do things as well as other humans, but talks about them way more than an elf would.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 14, 2009)

Rechan - I suppose that's an issue too.  No stereotype does mean that it's difficult to start with.  With a dwarf, you have an instant character hook.  And, even if you don't want drunk shortarse, you can at least play against type and that still brings a certain amount of recognition.

What would a half elf be like that would make the character stand out from just being a slightly better kind of human?


----------



## Jack99 (Sep 14, 2009)

Hussar said:


> What would a half elf be like that would make the character stand out from just being a slightly better kind of human?




How about the inner conflict of where he belongs or something. Fairly classic for an half-elf, and not something the other players would pick up upon during the first few sessions.


----------



## RefinedBean (Sep 14, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> How about the inner conflict of where he belongs or something. Fairly classic for an half-elf, and not something the other players would pick up upon during the first few sessions.




See, that's really setting dependent.  Half the time relations between elves and humans seems to be cordial enough, to a point where it shouldn't be THAT hard for a half-elf to come to some kind of understanding.  "I'll celebrate human holidays, but still take the elven ones off from work."

Half-orcs, on the other hand, not only look hideous, but their parents probably didn't, ah, get along.  Lots of conflict there.


----------



## Rechan (Sep 14, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> How about the inner conflict of where he belongs or something. Fairly classic for an half-elf, and not something the other players would pick up upon during the first few sessions.



As RefinedBean said, depends on setting. For instance, in Eberron, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs breed true. I think in the 4e core, Half-Orcs also breed true. 

So if your parents are half-elves and your grandparents are half-elves, then you may not feel like you're "Between worlds". 

Also, the "between worlds" is rather hard as a _character type_. I mean, unless you want to break into monolog, or there are a lot of racist humans giving you gruff about being pointy ears (or elves giving you gruff about being a dirty human), then it's just Not Going to Come Up.


----------



## Hammerhead (Sep 14, 2009)

I mean, any half-elf PC is pretty much going to be an ADVENTURER, a wandering hero that kills and loots. They're already not really going to "fit in". And I question whether or not Tanis constitutes the half-elven stereotype. Besides, the 4e half elf seems to have gotten over his teen angst and is described as being able to fit in with both elves and humans; their niche is more being able to get along with everybody (hence the bonus CHA) than nobody.

Role-playing is as much about choosing which aspects of your character to ignore as choosing which to reveal; no one cares what kind of food your character likes, for example. Jerry obviously cares more about role-playing his position as the head of Acquisitions Inc. than whatever his race might be. 

Hussar: Doesn't this tend to lead to situations where every single member of a non-human race is portrayed as being the same, or at least stereotyped. I mean, it's not like you minorities in fiction are portrayed with the same set of stereotypical traits that are emphasized at every single possible moment (well, actually, sometimes this does happen, but when it does it sucks). Nor should they specifically have to explain why they don't possess these stereotypical traits.

The bigger question is why Omin was a half elf in the first place. No Strength, no Wisdom, questionable other abilities...


----------



## Leatherhead (Sep 14, 2009)

I don't understand why are you are angry over a half-human that looks and acts like a human. As far as I can tell, the only obvious physical trait that distinguishes half-elves from humans is their slightly pointy ears. It's not that far of a stretch to imagine that some half-elves don't have those for whatever reason.

More to the point; Race is something that can go hidden if nobody brings it up, and I would dare say knowing it is metagaming if the race isn't completely obvious. I played a changeling that never had a reason to change forms until he was being targeted by an assassin, the entire group had no idea he could do that because they thought he was a human until that point. 

Don't get me wrong, I like Alien humanoids instead of humans in funny suits. Which is one of the reasons I don't like half-races in general, they shouldn't be able to breed in the first place.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Sep 14, 2009)

Leatherhead said:


> I don't understand why are you are angry over a half-human that looks and acts like a human. As far as I can tell, the only obvious physical trait that distinguishes half-elves from humans is their slightly pointy ears. It's not that far of a stretch to imagine that some half-elves don't have those for whatever reason.
> 
> More to the point; Race is something that can go hidden if nobody brings it up, and I would dare say knowing it is metagaming if the race isn't completely obvious. I played a changeling that never had a reason to change forms until he was being targeted by an assassin, the entire group had no idea he could do that because they thought he was a human until that point.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I like Alien humanoids instead of humans in funny suits. Which is one of the reasons I don't like half-races in general, they shouldn't be able to breed in the first place.



Hmmm... Changling Assassin? WHy wasn't that the first character idea springing into my mind?


----------



## Jack99 (Sep 14, 2009)

RefinedBean said:


> See, that's really setting dependent.  Half the time relations between elves and humans seems to be cordial enough, to a point where it shouldn't be THAT hard for a half-elf to come to some kind of understanding.  "I'll celebrate human holidays, but still take the elven ones off from work."
> 
> Half-orcs, on the other hand, not only look hideous, but their parents probably didn't, ah, get along.  Lots of conflict there.






Rechan said:


> As RefinedBean said, depends on setting. For instance, in Eberron, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs breed true. I think in the 4e core, Half-Orcs also breed true.
> 
> So if your parents are half-elves and your grandparents are half-elves, then you may not feel like you're "Between worlds".
> 
> Also, the "between worlds" is rather hard as a _character type_. I mean, unless you want to break into monolog, or there are a lot of racist humans giving you gruff about being pointy ears (or elves giving you gruff about being a dirty human), then it's just Not Going to Come Up.




The OP asked, I provided a suggestion. I never claimed it was the only solution. However, what is this talk about Eberron suddenly? Are PA playing in Eberron now? I must admit that I haven't found the time to listen to the newest adventures.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Sep 14, 2009)

The character that my forum name is named after, Majoru Oakheart was a half-elf.  I don't think his heritage ever really came up the whole time I played him.  He was always played as kind of a loner, with a taste for excitement, taking drastic risks, and adventuring.  He was known for extreme luck that kept him alive no matter what odds he faced, his ability to disarm traps, his really good AC, and his constant downplaying of the fact that he was a Thief(he was a Fighter/Thief in 2e).

He constantly referred to himself as a "Treasure Hunter and Adventurer" in order to explain his Thief abilities.  When the truth of the matter was that his human father left when he was really young, then he was kicked out of his elven community when he was caught stealing and was forced to survive on his own in the middle of human communities.

Now, what personality traits should I have played up while in a group in order to reinforce his half-elven heritage?  The focus of our adventures was always on what was happening at the time.  Either we needed to go into the Underdark to defeat the Drow since they were making raids against the surface or we decided to recover an artifact for some rich benefactor.  The fact that I was a half-elf never really came up.  We were more concerned about my ability to disarm traps before they cut the other party members in half and my ability to fight well enough to kill the monsters.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Sep 14, 2009)

tuxgeo said:


> Jim, on the other hand, is drawn with a goatee, which fairly clearly shows that he is human.




Remember, though, that half-elves can grow facial hair.  The most notable example of which is Tanis Half-Elven from Dragonlance, though we also see that in the 4e PHB's half-elf art.

Typically, the elves I've seen played start out as snobbish and arrogant.  Aloof.  Or, they're total nature freaks if they're wild elves.  Half-elves are often caught between worlds, neither fully human nor fully elven - ergo the "Half-Elven" surname that Tanis bears.  

Now, I have seen some elves played as humans with pointy ears and powers.  In those cases, I think the DM should try to throw in some good role-playing material to get the player thinking about things.  Throw in some other elves.  Talk about how they perceive things, or little things like the type of diet elves are used to eating.  

As for half-elves played like humans, I have no problem with that since some half-elves are actually raised in human society.  Consider as well that not every half-elf is a perfect blend of human and elf.  Some may take more after one parent than another.  Likewise, half-elves may not be exactly one-half of an elf.  Tanis and Laurana's son, Gilthas, was 3/4 elven, and could have been statted up as a half-elf (though an elf would have worked too).  

Also remember that not every half-elf has pointy ears and facial hair.  In the case of Omin, I'd say he probably took more after his human parent.

And as for the attack of opportunity/opportunity attack thing...well, after you've played a few editions, some terminology sticks with you.  I still call some races "demihumans", for example.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Sep 14, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Is there even a stereotype for half-elves?




There are a few.  Sometimes, they are presented as the "best of both worlds."  Sometimes, they are presented as ambassadors between the two races, or characters that can get along well with anybody.

When Tanis Half-Elven came around, we saw a new stereotype develop - that of the character caught between two worlds and accepted in neither.  This is a more tragic look on half-elves, and a very interesting one at that.

That being said, I work very hard whenever I play a half-elf to not have "Tanis clones."  It's a good theme, but like anything, it can be overdone.  So if I go for the tragic half-elf, I want a unique story behind it.


----------



## Rechan (Sep 14, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> The OP asked, I provided a suggestion. I never claimed it was the only solution. However, what is this talk about Eberron suddenly? Are PA playing in Eberron now? I must admit that I haven't found the time to listen to the newest adventures.



No, just using it as an example of half-races breeding true, therefore not needing to fit into that stereotype.

And, you offered a suggestion, and I offered a counter-point to your suggestion.


----------



## Rykion (Sep 14, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I don't understand why people play non-humans and then don't bother to play it up.  And, again, it's almost always the elf players.  Someone plays a dwarf?  No problem, grumpy drunk on demand.  Half-orc?  Not a worry, gotcha covered, crude big dumb dude coming up.  Halfling?  Sure, no worries - usually gets played up - trying to reach the top of the table, short arse jokes, head butts to the groin.
> 
> Why is it that elves get played as humans that can see in the dark?



Sorry I don't see playing a character as a grumpy drunk, crude big dumb person, or a short person as roleplaying a non-human.  It's simply roleplaying a cliched stereotype that could equally apply to a human. 

The "stereotypical" dwarf can include a strong work ethic, a bond to clan and hold, a practically unbreakable constitution, a strong sense of tradition and history, a hatred of elves, a love of gold and metalwork, an affinity for beer, and many other things.  Most dwarf characters will have some of these features, but will probably vary quite a bit from the norm.  Certainly some dwarves are grumpy drunks, but I would hardly consider that the epitome of good dwarven roleplaying.

Roleplaying a half-orc is an entirely different kettle of fish.  A crude big dumb dude with orc features is not likely to last long in human society unless he's the toughest guy around.  A half-orc could just as easily be roleplayed as someone with very good manners, but a severe anger management problem.  Or maybe the half-orc is a good natured oaf.  Of course, he or she might be a brainy wizard.

Halflings are short, but that isn't much in the way of roleplaying.  They can be hobbit-like, kender-like, or just about any way the player wants them to be.  

To sum up, I think it's important to actually think about a character's race and background.  I really don't see playing up a stereotype as being any better than simply playing a character as a human with pointy ears.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 14, 2009)

Rechan said:


> Come on now.
> 
> The joke isn't at the expense of the players. It's a comment about vampires.
> 
> Because vampires ARE, by and large, presented as  "extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and pretentious)" beings.





Uhm...what?  Let's look at this again, with a bit of extra bolding by yours truly:



Wulf Ratbane said:


> Because most of *the players who really enjoy* roleplaying extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and pretentious) beings are off playing Masquerade.




Kind of hard to see that as anything but a swipe at others.  A true statement about many of the people I have played Vampire with over the years, but certainly not a requirement. 




Hussar said:


> If you're going to play a non-human, it should come up EVERY SINGLE CHANCE you get.




Right after 2nd Ed came out, I was a freshman in high school and we were putting together a new gaming group.  One of the guys had only watched some D&D at lunch at school and hadn't played at all yet, so he introduced his character and then added, by way of description, "He's a 6 foot elf!".  We still pick on him about that to this day.  All the things you could say about what your character looks like and that is your personal description.  




Rechan said:


> Is there even a stereotype for half-elves?




If we use the example of Tanis Half-Elven, then the stereotype is being a whiny, wishy-washy pussy who worries about everything.  That and being over 100 but not really having learned anything yet.


----------



## tuxgeo (Sep 14, 2009)

Dragonhelm said:


> Remember, though, that half-elves can grow facial hair.  The most notable example of which is Tanis Half-Elven from Dragonlance, though we also see that in the 4e PHB's half-elf art.
> < snip >



You're right. Thanks for the reminder; I had forgotten that part of the PHB. (GrumbleGrumbleStupidAgingMemoryGrumble)


----------



## MarkB (Sep 14, 2009)

RefinedBean said:


> See, that's really setting dependent.  Half the time relations between elves and humans seems to be cordial enough, to a point where it shouldn't be THAT hard for a half-elf to come to some kind of understanding.  "I'll celebrate human holidays, but still take the elven ones off from work."
> 
> Half-orcs, on the other hand, not only look hideous, but their parents probably didn't, ah, get along.  Lots of conflict there.




Even that is setting-specific. Not only do Eberron half-orcs breed true as already mentioned, there are also communities in the Shadow Marches where orcs, humans and half-orcs live amongst each other - so a character of mixed orc and human parentage could still have a perfectly ordinary upbringing.



Pseudonym said:


> Wulf Ratbane said:
> 
> 
> > Because most of the players who really enjoy roleplaying extrahuman, aloof, arrogant, mysterious, immortal (and pretentious) beings are off playing Masquerade.
> ...




It was the "Listening to Wil Weaton using his fey step" line that I got stuck on.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 14, 2009)

MarkB said:


> It was the "Listening to Wil Weaton using his fey step" line that I got stuck on.




Which now makes me picture "Wil Wheaton:Eladrin".  Gamer stepping between realities to show up behind you, ready to roll his d20 to attack! heh


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Sep 15, 2009)

Regardless of the boundless opportunities for a half-elf to seem and act human (I think of as some milkmaid met the elf king in the dell or else the elf king replaced the human baby with a created being that looks mostly human but has an elf's blood, too much Poul Anderson)...

...I don't find it that grating if someone who pretends to be a half-elf for six hours a week in order to kill imaginary monsters and take their imaginary treasure or engage in imaginary drama with imaginary beings and also put's the effort of becoming a hobbyist lawyer/accountant into learning a game doesn't bother "imagining and getting into the head of the unique half-elven people"


----------



## Hussar (Sep 15, 2009)

Leatherhead said:


> I don't understand why are you are angry over a half-human that looks and acts like a human. As far as I can tell, the only obvious physical trait that distinguishes half-elves from humans is their slightly pointy ears. It's not that far of a stretch to imagine that some half-elves don't have those for whatever reason.
> 
> More to the point; Race is something that can go hidden if nobody brings it up, and I would dare say knowing it is metagaming if the race isn't completely obvious. I played a changeling that never had a reason to change forms until he was being targeted by an assassin, the entire group had no idea he could do that because they thought he was a human until that point.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I like Alien humanoids instead of humans in funny suits. Which is one of the reasons I don't like half-races in general, they shouldn't be able to breed in the first place.




Well, to be fair, as a Changeling that had never used his abilities, the whole point is to be just like the form you assume.  I wouldn't assume that a doppleganger walks around announcing himself either.  

But, your first part gets to the heart of it.  If he looks human, acts human, and doesn't, in any meaningful way, distinguish himself as anything but human, why is he not human?  What's the point?



Rykion said:


> Sorry I don't see playing a character as a grumpy drunk, crude big dumb person, or a short person as roleplaying a non-human.  It's simply roleplaying a cliched stereotype that could equally apply to a human.
> 
> The "stereotypical" dwarf can include a strong work ethic, a bond to clan and hold, a practically unbreakable constitution, a strong sense of tradition and history, a hatred of elves, a love of gold and metalwork, an affinity for beer, and many other things.  Most dwarf characters will have some of these features, but will probably vary quite a bit from the norm.  Certainly some dwarves are grumpy drunks, but I would hardly consider that the epitome of good dwarven roleplaying.




Oh, totally agree.  But, at the very least, it holds up a great big sign that says, "I'M A DWARF".  It might be crude, it might be simplistic, but, at least it's there.



> Roleplaying a half-orc is an entirely different kettle of fish.  A crude big dumb dude with orc features is not likely to last long in human society unless he's the toughest guy around.  A half-orc could just as easily be roleplayed as someone with very good manners, but a severe anger management problem.  Or maybe the half-orc is a good natured oaf.  Of course, he or she might be a brainy wizard.
> 
> Halflings are short, but that isn't much in the way of roleplaying.  They can be hobbit-like, kender-like, or just about any way the player wants them to be.
> 
> To sum up, I think it's important to actually think about a character's race and background.  I really don't see playing up a stereotype as being any better than simply playing a character as a human with pointy ears.




Like I said, at least the stereotype gives something of a hook.  Sure, you should try to move beyond that, but, it gives a decent amount of groundwork to start from.



Blair Goatsblood said:


> Regardless of the boundless opportunities for a half-elf to seem and act human (I think of as some milkmaid met the elf king in the dell or else the elf king replaced the human baby with a created being that looks mostly human but has an elf's blood, too much Poul Anderson)...
> 
> ...I don't find it that grating if someone who pretends to be a half-elf for six hours a week in order to kill imaginary monsters and take their imaginary treasure or engage in imaginary drama with imaginary beings and also put's the effort of becoming a hobbyist lawyer/accountant into learning a game doesn't bother "imagining and getting into the head of the unique half-elven people"




Fair enough.  If that's all you want out of gaming, then cool.  Me, I want characters that actually have personalities.  That are actually memorable.  It just annoys the crap out of me when the only reason to pick a race is for the bonuses.  "Oh, really?  You're a ((Insert race here))" is, to me, a complete failure to role play on the part of the player.

Compare Omin to Ayofell (or however you spell Wil Weaton's character's name).  Can you really say that Ayofell is not a memorable elf?


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Sep 15, 2009)

Hussar said:


> But, your first part gets to the heart of it.  If he looks human, acts human, and doesn't, in any meaningful way, distinguish himself as anything but human, why is he not human?  What's the point?



Maybe it's his deeds that are more than human rather than his personality.  Someone can be physically different and accomplish different things.  If you want to play a character that is way more nimble than a human can be, you play an elf of a halfling.

There are more ways to differentiate yourself than personality.



Hussar said:


> Oh, totally agree.  But, at the very least, it holds up a great big sign that says, "I'M A DWARF".  It might be crude, it might be simplistic, but, at least it's there.



It only holds up that sign because that's the way you think of dwarves.  To someone not familiar with the Dwarven stereotype, it instead put's up a sign saying "I'm a alcoholic Scotsman who is a miner".

It raises the question, if you want to play this sort of character, why not just play a human?  Dwarves don't offer anything that humans don't.



Hussar said:


> Like I said, at least the stereotype gives something of a hook.  Sure, you should try to move beyond that, but, it gives a decent amount of groundwork to start from.



But why start with a stereotype?  What if your dwarf doesn't fit the stereotypes at all?  He is a Dwarven Wizard who spent all of his time studying magic from dusty tomes in a tower under a human mentor.  He hasn't been underground in his life, has been taught proper manners, doesn't drink at all because he values intelligence and being sober.  What can you do to make this character's race front and center?  Especially in a game where 95% of the action is focused outward on things like "will the villain accomplish his evil plan", "can we stop the monsters from destroying the village", and "where can we find the artifact?"

And more importantly, how can you make your race front and center in a group with 6 different races without grandstanding or taking the focus off the group as a whole instead of specifically being about your own character.



Hussar said:


> Fair enough.  If that's all you want out of gaming, then cool.  Me, I want characters that actually have personalities.  That are actually memorable.  It just annoys the crap out of me when the only reason to pick a race is for the bonuses.  "Oh, really?  You're a ((Insert race here))" is, to me, a complete failure to role play on the part of the player.



He didn't say that the half-elf in question wouldn't have a memorable personality.  He said that he didn't expect someone to spend all of their time trying to get into the head of the unique half-elf race.

As I mentioned in a previous post.  I played a half-elf fighter/rogue back in second edition who had a unique and memorable personality.  People remember him for that time that he took on a nasty enemy single-handed and saved the entire party from certain death.  They remember him for the time they had to teach him not to steal from the party.  They remember the time he had his hands cut off by a trap and they had to get a regenerate spell cast on him.  They remember the time he used a Rod of Beguiling on a Drow Princess and forced her to wear a Helm of Opposite Alignment and then married her which caused all sorts of problems for the party.

Over and over again in TV Shows, non-humans are used mostly as a plot device to show us how human we really are.  That's their entire reason to exist.  Often, the idea of an episode is that despite being non-human, they are more like us than anyone knows.

Star Trek uses this in particular.  They meet non-human races who have one aspect of their personality emphasized, but they are mostly human.  Somehow they always find their similarities and get along just fine.  Often because one member of their race sees beyond their exaggerated attributes and sees it from the human point of view.

Examples of this are rampant.  Humans meet a race that keeps slaves and aren't remorseful about it.  The humans show them what it means to be compassionate and they embrace the idea and become, basically....human.  Showing that every race in the universe has human values at heart.



Hussar said:


> Compare Omin to Ayofell (or however you spell Wil Weaton's character's name).  Can you really say that Ayofell is not a memorable elf?



Yes, Ayofell is a memorable elf.  Omin is a memorable cleric.  They just choose to concentrate on different things.


----------



## Storminator (Sep 15, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Compare Omin to Ayofell (or however you spell Wil Weaton's character's name).  Can you really say that Ayofell is not a memorable elf?




Wheaton has 20+ years of gaming and 30 years as an actor. Wouldn't it be shocking if he _didn't_ play a memorable PC? I'm not sure Omin's player has the same chops.

PS


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 15, 2009)

Rykion said:


> Sorry I don't see playing a character as a grumpy drunk as roleplaying a non-human.  It's simply roleplaying a cliched stereotype that could equally apply to a human. Certainly some dwarves are grumpy drunks, but *I would hardly consider that the epitome of good dwarven roleplaying*.




Please don't launch broadsides like that. Show some respect for your fellow gamers.

I happen to really enjoy roleplaying dwarves-- preferably in as shallow and cliche a way as possible-- and I very, very deeply and sincerely self-identify with them. 

I am offended by the continued negative stereotyping of dwarves and the players who play them going on unchecked in this thread since the OP. 

Particularly since you didn't include _murderous bastard_ in your list of cliches. I may not have exactly pioneered the murderous bastard cliche, but I like to think I at least moved the _art _forward.

_Respect_.



SSquirrel said:


> If we use the example of Tanis Half-Elven, then the stereotype is being a whiny, wishy-washy p---y who worries about everything.




I'm not sure if there's a clear, consistent, and coherent policy around here on half-elves as there is for elves, but if there are any self-identifying whiny, wishy-washy p----s out there-- and let me be clear, I am _definitely _not suggesting that there are-- then they are probably hammering on that Report Post button right about now.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 15, 2009)

Storminator said:


> Wheaton has 20+ years of gaming and 30 years as an actor. Wouldn't it be shocking if he _didn't_ play a memorable PC? I'm not sure Omin's player has the same chops.
> 
> PS




Heh.  That's true.  Fair enough.  But, compare Binwin to Omin then.  Binwin pretty much screams Dwarf to me.  Even if he is a bit of a stereotype.

Gonna chop up Majoru O's post out of order.  



			
				Maj O said:
			
		

> But why start with a stereotype? What if your dwarf doesn't fit the stereotypes at all? He is a Dwarven Wizard who spent all of his time studying magic from dusty tomes in a tower under a human mentor. He hasn't been underground in his life, has been taught proper manners, doesn't drink at all because he values intelligence and being sober. What can you do to make this character's race front and center? Especially in a game where 95% of the action is focused outward on things like "will the villain accomplish his evil plan", "can we stop the monsters from destroying the village", and "where can we find the artifact?"




I think I did mention playing against type earlier on.  But, yes, I of course agree with you.  

But, then, we can still portray our Dwarf wizard as a dwarf.  Stroking his beard, mentioning his size, gruff voice, and the first time he meets other dwarves, you can play up the fact that he's playing against type.  Nothing wrong with that.  But, you can still make sure that the table knows you are a dwarf with a little bit of effort.



> Maybe it's his deeds that are more than human rather than his personality. Someone can be physically different and accomplish different things. If you want to play a character that is way more nimble than a human can be, you play an elf of a halfling.
> 
> There are more ways to differentiate yourself than personality.




In a role playing game?  Isn't personality the primary method for portraying your character?  We don't actually describe ourselves very often in game, or at least my groups don't.  After that initial description in the first session, that's usually about it.  I would argue that personality is by far the primary way to distinguish your character.  And, if you are not human, that part should be part of your personality.  

It shouldn't be the only thing.  Most definitely.  I'm not saying you should go around telling everyone "I'm a ((insert race here))" every session.  It should show up in how you speak, in the things you do, and in the way you react to things.  It helps too if the GM gives you some lines to bounce off of as well.  Putting another half elf in the bar for example helps.  It doesn't have to be only the player.



> As I mentioned in a previous post. I played a half-elf fighter/rogue back in second edition who had a unique and memorable personality. People remember him for that time that he took on a nasty enemy single-handed and saved the entire party from certain death. They remember him for the time they had to teach him not to steal from the party. They remember the time he had his hands cut off by a trap and they had to get a regenerate spell cast on him. They remember the time he used a Rod of Beguiling on a Drow Princess and forced her to wear a Helm of Opposite Alignment and then married her which caused all sorts of problems for the party.




Other than the race restrictions, why was he a half-elf?  Was there anything in that character that distinguished him in any way from a human in how he was portrayed to the party?

If not, then he should have been a human IMO.  Granted, in 2e, with its restrictive class/race rules, I can understand why he wasn't if that's the class you wanted to play.  But, to me, that's just exacerbating the problem.  It's probably why you see "Human that can see in the dark" so often in D&D.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 15, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> I'm not sure if there's a clear, consistent, and coherent policy around here on half-elves as there is for elves, but if there are any self-identifying whiny, wishy-washy pussies out there-- and let me be clear, I am _definitely _not suggesting that there are-- then they are probably hammering on that Report Post button right about now.




Another Tanis analogy, to go with the wishy-washy.  Tanis Half-Elven = Charlie Brown with pointy ears.  I don't know if any of the rest of the Heroes of the Lance match up against the Peanuts gang..maybe Tika and Freida, what with her naturally curly hair.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 15, 2009)

Given that every single D&D race will include individual examples that run the gamut of a range of personalities no less broad than that of human characters, and that adventurers are, by their nature, highly exceptional individuals, there is absolutely no reason to criticise any player whose character does not match their species's racial stereotypes.


----------



## malraux (Sep 15, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Compare Omin to Ayofell (or however you spell Wil Weaton's character's name).  Can you really say that Ayofell is not a memorable elf?




I dunno, I think here you just torpedoed your own point, as Ayofell is not an elf.  Eladrin are far more distant from elves than half-elves are from humans, yet you cannot distinguish between the two.

Moreover, in 4e, half-elves are not all that distinct.  They are not inherently distant from both elven and human societies but adept at both.  "They are charismatic, confident, and open-minded and are natural diplomats, negotiators, and leaders."  "Half-elves naturally inspire loyalty in others, and they return that feeling with deep friendship and a keen sense of responsibility for those who place themselves in their care. Half-elf warlords and generals do not order their followers into danger that they would not face themselves, and they usually lead from the front, trusting their allies to follow. 

Half-elves have no culture of their own and are not a numerous people. They usually bear human or elf names, sometimes using one name among elves and a different one among humans. Some are anxious about their place in the world, feeling no kinship with any race, except other half-elves, but most call themselves citizens of the world and kin to all. " PHB pg 43

How does that not describe the cleric's personality?  He leads a group of loyal allies into battle, ensuring their safety.  Omin does often take the lead for negotiations, which is perhaps the most defining trait of the half-elf.


----------



## malraux (Sep 15, 2009)

Hussar said:


> So, play it up.  For example, in 3e, a half-elf ages at about 1/2 the rate of a human.  That's huge!  The half-elf's adoptive parents will likely die of old age long before the half elf is even all that old.  That, right there, should set you pretty far apart from being human.




In 4e, "Half-elves have life spans comparable to humans, but like elves they remain vigorous well into old age."  And why would a half-elf have adoptive parents, rather than just parents?


----------



## Rykion (Sep 15, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> I am offended by the continued negative stereotyping of dwarves and the players who play them going on unchecked in this thread since the OP.



I think you missed the point of my post, as it was to point out that the listed stereotypes were negative.  I pointed out many positive attributes that can be included in roleplaying a "stereotypical" dwarf.  One of the things that I hate about the _Lord of the Rings _movies is how Gimli was changed into stereotypical comic relief.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 15, 2009)

Well short people are funny and short people with big beards and an axe are even funnier.  Seems like the logic to me


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 15, 2009)

Rykion said:


> I think you missed the point of my post, as it was to point out that the listed stereotypes were negative. I pointed out many positive attributes that can be included in roleplaying a "stereotypical" dwarf.




I don't want to put words in your mouth (!) but it sounds like you're saying if I don't want to be called a grumpy drunk, I have to stop _roleplaying wrong_?

Yowch!



SSquirrel said:


> Another Tanis analogy, to go with the wishy-washy.  Tanis Half-Elven = Charlie Brown with pointy ears.




And as for you, on behalf of round-headed kids everywhere, your blatant antimacroencephalitism has been noted. If this outrage is permitted to stand, I'll have no choice but to cry myself to sleep tonight on my huge pillow.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRmLGYSc0XQ&NR=1"]![/ame]


----------



## Ferret (Sep 15, 2009)

And there goes another sarcasm driven china bull through the thread.

The only character I've got ready to play, doesn't want to be a dwarf. She's probably too ashamed to even speak to other dwarves. Complete outcast. No beard to stroke, no gruff voice.

I've never seen dwarves as Drunked Scottish Miners, never.

You might as well have a grumpy Elf, annoyed at having to always deal with humans/non-elves.

Or an aloof Dwarf, too concerned with clan pedigree and pride to be concerned with others.

And the fact that half-elves really don't have, as far as I'm aware, a hugely strong back ground/ fantasy stereotype. Why do any of them [player races] need to be type cast?


----------



## Rykion (Sep 16, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> I don't want to put words in your mouth (!) but it sounds like you're saying if I don't want to be called a grumpy drunk, I have to stop _roleplaying wrong_?
> 
> Yowch!



I didn't say anyone was roleplaying wrong.  Never have, and I never will.  Well, maybe if someone goes all _Mazes and Monsters _I might. 

I was pointing out that even a grumpy drunk usually has more depth.  There is usually a reason for the grumpy in a dwarf.  Something like losing his clan, death of a loved one, some type of public disgrace, got drunk and woke up with an elf, etc.  Of course, most dwarves tend to act a bit curmudgeonly.  They have their traditions and let others know when they're doing something the wrong way.  Most dwarves enjoy their ale, but that doesn't mean they're all drunks.  Again most drunks are going to have a background reason for being the way they are.   

When I said that grumpy drunk isn't the epitome of good dwarven roleplaying, I was reinforcing the fact that it could be used as a description for a character of any race in D&D.  It isn't the definition of what makes a dwarf a dwarf.  

That said, there isn't anything stopping a dwarf from simply being a grumpy drunk.  I've played plenty of campaigns with no more character motivation than kill stuff and take its loot.


----------



## Mercule (Sep 16, 2009)

Rechan said:


> I'm of the opinion that the more non-human, the better. I like me some alien characters (Thri-keen wanting to eat the fallen? Yay!)



See, this I'm all good with.  That's different.  Sure, you could do that as a human culture, but it's sufficiently outside the norm to make a race interesting.



> The problem though is that 90% of your non-humans can be PLAYED as a human. Big dumb aggressive half-orc? Big dumb aggressive human. Heavy drinking Scottish-accented dwarf? Heavy drinking scottish-accented human. Kender klepto? Most thieves I've ran into are klepto or annoying, so it's not race dependent. So what's the difference?
> 
> Ultimately, it comes down to this: the fantasy racial stereotypes are just subcategories of Human culture/behavior. Prime example are Dwarves, who are just Scottish/Norse. But that's also been a peeve of mine - that each non-human race has ONE culture, one stereotype, while Humans have an endless variety of them.



Agreed.  In my last campaign, I tried to look at elves and figure out why they might be alien.  It had mixed success because I delved into it, but the player of the elven knight just wanted to stab orcs.  *sigh*


----------



## Umbran (Sep 16, 2009)

Okay, after reports from about seven different people, I will make this request on behalf of those who find it offensive:

Unless you're talking about felines, please refrain from using the P-word.  Thanks, all.


----------



## Storminator (Sep 16, 2009)

I'm playing a stereotypical dwarf.

He was raised in a human village, after his father abandoned the dwarvish lands for reasons that are never discussed. He has no first hand knowledge of dwarves, and acts exactly as he thinks everyone expects dwarves to act. My DM commented "so, the real dwarves laugh at your lederhosen?" Which sums up my character perfectly.

PS


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Sep 16, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Fair enough.  If that's all you want out of gaming, then cool.  Me, I want characters that actually have personalities.  That are actually memorable.  It just annoys the crap out of me when the only reason to pick a race is for the bonuses.  "Oh, really?  You're a ((Insert race here))" is, to me, a complete failure to role play on the part of the player.




Ahh, I meant it more in a "having fun is a priority over method acting" manner.

I'm not in a position to judge how good a job someone is doing portraying an imaginary being kinda philosophy. Regardless of a player's racial choice, some players will assume funny voices, come up with elaborate backstories and make their character come alive. Other players say stuff like "I negotiate with the Baron to release the prisoner" or "I flatter the fair maiden" and want to the name their character Bob...and there's nothing wrong with either kind of player.

I'm judging someone on their acting skills, you fail as a "role player" at my table by being (OOC) disruptive, a jerk or a poor team player. If I have a friend who want to play, and I would enjoy their company at the table, if they want to name their characeter "Richard Marx" and describe their actions in a remote, clinical style, and they have fun, everybody wins.

I don't find the non-role players detrimental to a enjoyable gaming experience, if anything, they do give the gung-ho ham roleplayers more spolight real estate to showboat in. And the non-role players will porbably enjoy watching that show more than worrying about how good a job they are doing of getting into the head of and talking like a freakin' frost nobbit in a made-up world.

Beside, it seems to me that the better part of a character's personality emerges through play and the character's experiences. 

Although, I still can't get my head around there being a "right way to role play a half-elf", i.e. "I dunno, I was raised by humans in a human community and people treated me differently becuase it was that kind of society, I grew up pretty well adjusted and was going to be apprenticed to a glassblower before I started this adventuring thing. I guess that's why I don't act very "half-elven...""

BTW, in my game there are no mechanical benefits to your racial choice, aside possibly making you a viable candidate for a sacrifice in carcosan ritual suicide. (with the exception of the Cactus Man character, butt hat was becuase the player found out about they existed on the planet and was really excited about having a cactus character)

And in the game "Bob the Fighter" pulls his weight and is just as important as "Thandalial Feymarchwarden the Tarot Dancer." We do spend hours in sessions "role-playing," Bob the Fighter usually just shops via. equipment lists, looks at the maps, asks questions about the world, or interacts with NPCs in his gold ole' "I ask around the town about any rumors of dungeons, monsters or treasure" style.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Sep 16, 2009)

Storminator said:


> I'm playing a stereotypical dwarf.
> 
> He was raised in a human village, after his father abandoned the dwarvish lands for reasons that are never discussed. He has no first hand knowledge of dwarves, and acts exactly as he thinks everyone expects dwarves to act. My DM commented "so, the real dwarves laugh at your lederhosen?" Which sums up my character perfectly.
> 
> PS




Awesome!! My human character a standard D&D games sarcastically stereotypes the elf character "Of course can he sneak upon them! He'll be frolicking silently on blade sof grass while songbirds continue their song perched on his pointy elf hat and baby animals come up for him to pet them."


----------



## fanboy2000 (Sep 16, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> I'm not sure if there's a clear, consistent, and coherent policy around here on half-elves as there is for elves, but if there are any self-identifying whiny, wishy-washy p----s out there-- and let me be clear, I am _definitely _not suggesting that there are-- then they are probably hammering on that Report Post button right about now.



I like half-elves because they understand that not everything is about wine tasting and eating cheese, but wine and cheese is a good combination under the right circumstances.

If it were up to dwarves, the blood an the walls would look like rorschach tests after every encounter.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 16, 2009)

Blair Goatsblood said:
			
		

> Although, I still can't get my head around there being a "right way to role play a half-elf", i.e. "I dunno, I was raised by humans in a human community and people treated me differently becuase it was that kind of society, I grew up pretty well adjusted and was going to be apprenticed to a glassblower before I started this adventuring thing. I guess that's why I don't act very "half-elven...""




Well, there might not be a "right" way to play a non-human, but, IMO, there most definitely is a wrong way.  Like I said, if, several sessions into the game, one of the other players (or heck the rest of the players) turn to you and are surprised that you aren't human, then you're doing it wrong.

I'm sorry if people find that offensive, but, come on here.  Isn't role assumption sort of part and parcel to role playing?  Sure, I can play that Githyanki Psion just like he was Joe Fytor, but, really, at the end of the day, I have no problem with someone saying I missed out on a whole boat load of opportunities in play.

Oh, and btw, yes, I misspoke when I called Wil Wheaton's character an elf.  Sue me.  I'm still getting used to the whole elf/eladrin thing.  I mean, aren't eladrin supposed to be a kind of elf?  Is it really that far out of line to make that mistake?  Sorry if it is.  All I know, is that is one seriously memorable character.  No one is EVER going to turn to him and say, "Jeez, you're not human?"

Which is my entire point.

It's not that you must stand on the table screaming every single chance you get that you aren't human.  It's just that, IMO, if you choose a non-human race for your character, putting that five minutes of effort in during play to differentiate yourself somehow from the rest of the pack is worth it.


----------



## Wepwawet (Sep 16, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Well, there might not be a "right" way to play a non-human, but, IMO, there most definitely is a wrong way.  Like I said, if, several sessions into the game, one of the other players (or heck the rest of the players) turn to you and are surprised that you aren't human, then you're doing it wrong.



Maybe it's the other way around.
Maybe the other players are too distracted or too self centered on their role playing that they failed to notice that he's an half-elf 

Or the half elf guy is such a good roleplayer that he fooled everyone into thinking he was a human until they notice that he can see in the dark.
Half-elves aren't that different from humans.
With a human upbringing what distinguishes him from another human?

EDIT: btw, I didn't listen to the podcast


----------



## Hussar (Sep 16, 2009)

Wepwawet said:


> Maybe it's the other way around.
> Maybe the other players are too distracted or too self centered on their role playing that they failed to notice that he's an half-elf
> 
> Or the half elf guy is such a good roleplayer that he fooled everyone into thinking he was a human until they notice that he can see in the dark.
> ...




Heh, it could be the other players.  But, IME, it's typically not.

I think I mentioned this in my first post that this is my personal axe to grind here.  Stop trying to be reasonable.  

Like I've said, IMO, it's up to the player to make sure that his character is played in such a way that the other players shouldn't be shocked that he's not human.  In the same way that I'm not really shocked when my friend Jin Sook is Korean or my student, Hayato, is Japanese.  It's pretty apparent from talking to these people what their backgrounds are.  

Then again, it flies up my nose when I get called an American all the time.  I make a bit of a point of correcting people and telling them that no, I am Canadian.  And when I was recently asked if I was Russian, I said no, I'm from Canada.  

There's a pretty wide bit of road between hardcore stereotype and cypher.  I'm not saying that you should be screaming at the top of your lungs every chance you get.  But, as a player, I think you (and I mean you in the general sense, not YOU specifically) should make a five minute effort once in a while to inject into the game the fact that you are not the same species as the guy sitting next to you.  It really isn't that hard.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Sep 16, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Isn't role assumption sort of part and parcel to role playing?



In short, no. You can still be playing a role-playing game if you don't go in for role-assumption or play-acting.


----------



## malraux (Sep 16, 2009)

I'm still unclear on how a half-elf raised among human's would act all that different.  Beyond just announcing "hey guys, look at my pointy ears" the attitude and actions of half-elves is not going to be all that distinct from humans.

The elf/eladrin split is much farther in the past than a half-elf born to a human in human society.  I'm not sure about the default setting or FR, but in Eberron the split happened around the age of Giants (~40,000 years ago).  I agree that the really distinct races should be different in play, as the dragonborn, eladrin, dwarf, orc, etc are.  But half-elf is still half human, and thus should be really close to human in the game, at least relative to dragonborn, goliaths, devas, or the other weird races.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 16, 2009)

Gentlegamer said:


> In short, no. You can still be playing a role-playing game if you don't go in for role-assumption or play-acting.




True.  You can do that. 

Certainly not my cup of tea and it's something I think that most gamers outgrow pretty quickly, but, hey, whatever floats your boat.

Just not at my table.  

I don't ask for a whole lot.  But, yeah, I do expect my players to play more than Fytor, "I use swords".  I'm not much for funny voices and whatnot, but, a bare minimum is expected, and enjoyed, with the people I play with.



malraux said:


> I'm still unclear on how a half-elf raised among human's would act all that different.  Beyond just announcing "hey guys, look at my pointy ears" the attitude and actions of half-elves is not going to be all that distinct from humans.
> 
> The elf/eladrin split is much farther in the past than a half-elf born to a human in human society.  I'm not sure about the default setting or FR, but in Eberron the split happened around the age of Giants (~40,000 years ago).  I agree that the really distinct races should be different in play, as the dragonborn, eladrin, dwarf, orc, etc are.  But half-elf is still half human, and thus should be really close to human in the game, at least relative to dragonborn, goliaths, devas, or the other weird races.




Well, let's use this group as an example.  Originally, IIRC, Wil Weaton wasn't part of the group.  His Eladrin character came in later.  Now, there's a perfect opportunity.  Even if you're a half-elf raised by humans, it's pretty natural to be at least a little curious about the other half of your ancestry.

So, some time after meeting Aofel (or however you spell that), the half elf character makes a point of asking questions about where the elf came from.  He wants to know a bit more about the other side of the tree, so to speak.  Maybe drop in the odd bit of elven dialogue (they both do speak elven).

Maybe make a point when in town (Shadowfell wasn't it?) to look up some elf stuff or buy something made by elves.  Complain that the tailors never get things to fit right since you're not built like a human (a complaint I make here in Japan ALL the time - being over 6 foot and ... erm... built for comfort makes buying clothes here a real chore).  

That's off the top of my head.


----------



## malraux (Sep 16, 2009)

But half-elves are basically just slightly slimmer than average humans.  And adopt the dress style of their upbringing.  So finding pret a porter clothing (assuming that even exists) that fits is not hard.

And again eladrin =/= elf.  The other half of the family tree are the elves, not the eladrin.  The eladrin are at best distant cousins, as closely related as the drow.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 16, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Well, let's use this group as an example.  Originally, IIRC, Wil Weaton wasn't part of the group.  His Eladrin character came in later.  Now, there's a perfect opportunity.  Even if you're a half-elf raised by humans, it's pretty natural to be at least a little curious about the other half of your ancestry.
> 
> So, some time after meeting Aofel (or however you spell that), the half elf character makes a point of asking questions about where the elf came from.  He wants to know a bit more about the other side of the tree, so to speak.  Maybe drop in the odd bit of elven dialogue (they both do speak elven).




As already established, Wil's character is not an elf, he's an eladrin. It'd be like a baboon/orang-utan hybrid who's never met an orang-utan asking his new friend the chimpanzee to tell him all about orang-utan society.

That aside, maybe Aofel isn't the first ever elven character he's met, and he's already long since satisfied his curiosity about elves.



> Maybe make a point when in town (Shadowfell wasn't it?) to look up some elf stuff or buy something made by elves.  Complain that the tailors never get things to fit right since you're not built like a human (a complaint I make here in Japan ALL the time - being over 6 foot and ... erm... built for comfort makes buying clothes here a real chore).
> 
> That's off the top of my head.




Half-elves aren't _that_ rare. They're likely as well catered-for as any other race by tailors in general, and not especially well catered-for by elven tailors, any more than they would be by human ones.

I just don't get why this rubs you up the wrong way, especially with a half-elven character. I see no need for any player to go out of their way to emphasise their race's stereotypes when playing, given that it's just one aspect of a complete character, and half-elves simply don't have that much there to play up in the first place.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 16, 2009)

malraux said:


> But half-elves are basically just slightly slimmer than average humans.  And adopt the dress style of their upbringing.  So finding pret a porter clothing (assuming that even exists) that fits is not hard.
> 
> And again eladrin =/= elf.  The other half of the family tree are the elves, not the eladrin.  The eladrin are at best distant cousins, as closely related as the drow.




Well considering the drow were once light elves who turned their back on the surface world and adopted Lloth as their deity instead, that's pretty close.  The races split several thousand years ago, but in the end, eladrin are still elves.


----------



## Dire Bare (Sep 16, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Well, there might not be a "right" way to play a non-human, but, IMO, there most definitely is a wrong way.




No.

It's cool if you personally prefer to roleplay non-human races as "different" in some way.  And as DM, if you "enforce" this preference at your table, well I suppose that's okay . . . although I probably wouldn't enjoy playing at your table.

But to criticize someone else for not playing the way you do . . . badwrongfun . . . is just uncool man.

D&D fantasy races tend to the same issue as Star Trek races . . . different HUMAN stereotypes with wrinkly foreheads, or pointed ears.  This has been pointed out in the thread before, but it bears repeating.

Playing a half-elf as "different" is cool.  But not focusing on that aspect of the game is also cool.  As long as the folks playing the game are having fun there is *no wrong way to do it*.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Sep 16, 2009)

"I had no idea your character was black. He should act more black!"


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 17, 2009)

So we just need to search more deeply for standard stereotypes?  Dwarves are known for their beer, any particular food they love?  Particular mode of travel, conversational standards (other than the scottish accent).  

We frequently see fantasy/alien races in film that appear to fit the stereotypes of modern ethnic groups.  In the Star Wars prequels, the Gungans were viewed to be Jamaican-ish, the Trade Federation appeared to be modeled (and voiced) by some East Asian ethnic variety, etc etc.  Do Gnomes or Half Orcs or Dragonborn have similar counterpoints?  Or would discussion on this line of thought just get problematic quickly?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 17, 2009)

SSquirrel said:


> We frequently see fantasy/alien races in film that appear to fit the stereotypes of modern ethnic groups.  In the Star Wars prequels, the Gungans were viewed to be Jamaican-ish, the Trade Federation appeared to be modeled (and voiced) by some East Asian ethnic variety, etc etc.  Do Gnomes or Half Orcs or Dragonborn have similar counterpoints?  Or would discussion on this line of thought just get problematic quickly?




I don't think this line is problematic, so long as we remember to consider the good along with the bad - to not talk about modeling only the flaws of real-world cultures, but also their strengths.

The Star Wars examples are not the best, in my opinion, merely because they were not well done.  I would point you at the TV show Babylon 5 for better examples:  

The Centauri Republic were the late Roman Empire.
The Narn were a genericized middle-eastern culture.
The Mimbari were a stylized semi-feudal Japan.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 17, 2009)

Right, and I never really got into Bab 5 so I wouldn't have that reference to post.  The Star Wars were a quick example of one way to re-color an ethnicity for your own purposes.  Never said it was a godo one, just one way you could


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Sep 18, 2009)

SSquirrel said:


> So we just need to search more deeply for standard stereotypes?  Dwarves are known for their beer, any particular food they love?  Particular mode of travel, conversational standards (other than the scottish accent).




Dwarves are doing alright, it is elves and eladrin that need the help. The snooty elf stereotype is actually useless because there is a strong implication that he/she would not be caught dead in the company of lesser races. They really need a stereotype that justifies adverturing.


----------



## tuxgeo (Sep 18, 2009)

ardoughter said:


> Dwarves are doing alright, it is elves and eladrin that need the help. The snooty elf stereotype is actually useless because there is a strong implication that he/she would not be caught dead in the company of lesser races. They really need a stereotype that justifies adverturing.



Umm, I'm having trouble with this. I imagine that the trouble that I am having derives from the edition-change, where 3.5E High Elf becomes 4E Eladrin. 

In fantasy tropes that I admire (OK, primarily Tolkien), it is the High Elves (4E Eladrin) that have the most notably snooty attitude, whereas Tolkien's wood-elves (4E Elves) are most typically represented by Legolas son of Thranduil, who was companionable enough and gregarious enough to offer his help to Frodo before Gimli son of Gloin offered his own.

So, to answer the stated question: The thing that 4E Elves bring to an adventuring party is Perception, coupled with a distinct presence of Dexterity (both already reflected in the racial Stat bonuses). In 4E, Elves aren't so much "snooty" as they are "innocent" and "primitive," and (to quote G.B. Shaw) they "think that the customs of [their] tribe and island are the laws of nature." (spoken of Brittanus in _Caesar and Cleopatra_)


----------



## Hussar (Sep 18, 2009)

Blair Goatsblood said:


> "I had no idea your character was black. He should act more black!"




Heh, I was wondering if this would come up.

Would it be fine if, at the table, in a modern game, halfway through the campaign, it suddenly came out that one of the players was black.  Everyone at the table (barring the player of course) had no idea.  The character was played in such a way that the issue of his background never came up.  Not once.  Not one single time.

And that's good roleplaying?

I know I'm taking flak for badwrongfun and all that.  Fine.  Y'know what?  I don't care.  If a player cannot take 5 minutes to establish a core element of their character - and yes, I do consider the fact that my character is a different SPECIES than another character to be an important fact - that's bad roleplaying.

Heck, if I did it as a writer, I'd get hammered.  If my fantasy novel was two hundred pages in before I established that Legolas wasn't human, I'd be a very poor writer.  "What do your elven eyes see?" is all it takes.  Ok, it's a crappy line, but, you get the point.  If my Twilek Jedi goes three sessions before the fact that he's blue and has "brain tails" comes out, I'm going to say I failed.

You can nitpick my examples all you like.  That's fine.  Get your own examples.  My point was, establishing a character's race is a very simple thing.  It takes all of 5 minutes to do.  Again, and I'll keep repeating myself so long as people keep taking it the wrong way, I'm NOT saying that you have to make your race the most important aspect of your character.  

By no means does your race have to be the most important aspect of your character.  However, it IS an aspect of your character and should be brought into play at some point.  At least brought in enough that the other players at the table aren't surprised ten or fifteen hours into play that you aren't what they thought you were.

I'm not picking on this particular example, really.  It's just one of a bajillion I've seen over the years, almost exclusively with elves and half-elves.  For some reason, people are capable of establishing the race of their character with almost any other race.  With elves?  It's "I'm a human that sees in the dark".


----------



## MarkB (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Heh, I was wondering if this would come up.
> 
> Would it be fine if, at the table, in a modern game, halfway through the campaign, it suddenly came out that one of the players was black.  Everyone at the table (barring the player of course) had no idea.  The character was played in such a way that the issue of his background never came up.  Not once.  Not one single time.
> 
> And that's good roleplaying?




It's certainly not _bad_ roleplaying.

Details of a character's physical appearance should be mentioned when they're first introduced, but it's easy for other players to miss things at that point, and afterwards, those details may not come up again for a long time.

Some players like to have their character fundamentally shaped by their racial background. Others (or even the same player with a different character) prefer to have other things define their character, with race only the most minor factor. Both approaches are right.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> And that's good roleplaying?




I don't think you can say without knowing more information - like, has the character's race been _relevant_?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 18, 2009)

ardoughter said:


> They really need a stereotype that justifies adverturing.




I disagree, unless you want to argue that the race, _as a whole_, is adventuring.  In most worlds, adventurers are not a sizable fraction of the population.  Adventurers are exceptions to the general behavior of the race, not examples of the general behavior.

So, the individual character needs to have a reason to adventure - the race as a whole can do what it darn well pleases.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 18, 2009)

Umbran said:


> I don't think you can say without knowing more information - like, has the character's race been _relevant_?




I disagree.  I think I can pretty easily say that.

How can a character's race not be relevant?

Really.  How can it not have ever come up?  Isn't a character's species about as relevant as its gender and, at the very least, general appearance?

Again, if I was writing a novel and, three or four chapters in, suddenly sprang on the reader, "Oh hey, by the way, so and so isn't really human, he can see in the dark.  He's a half elf." that would be piss poor writing.  Unless there was a specific reason why it wasn't mentioned, this should, at the very least, get a smidgeon of screen time.  At least enough to establish a picture of the character.

Essentially, by not establishing the character's species, the player has made little to no effort to portray his character as it actually exists in the game.  The other players have no idea what you actually are.  Their mental image of the character is wrong, not through any fault of their own, but because they were not provided with some pretty relevant information.

There is a great deal of space between Chris Rock style rants on how the Man is Keeping Him Down and Fytor Goodwithswords.  You don't need to carry a sandwich board proclaiming the character's species every single time you turn around.  However, a bit of effort, at least once in a while, just to provide the other players with enough information to have an accurate mental picture of your character is hardly, IMO, too much to ask.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Heh, I was wondering if this would come up.
> 
> Would it be fine if, at the table, in a modern game, halfway through the campaign, it suddenly came out that one of the players was black.  Everyone at the table (barring the player of course) had no idea.  The character was played in such a way that the issue of his background never came up.  Not once.  Not one single time.
> 
> And that's good roleplaying?



If you're playing a _modern _game (early 21st Century), I'd say the role-playing has been excellent and should be praised.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> There is a great deal of space between Chris Rock style rants on how the Man is Keeping Him Down and Fytor Goodwithswords.  You don't need to carry a sandwich board proclaiming the character's species every single time you turn around.  However, a bit of effort, at least once in a while, just to provide the other players with enough information to have an accurate mental picture of your character is hardly, IMO, too much to ask.




You know, speaking of Chris Rock....ok, time to paraphrase   Eladrin are basically the snooty high elves and elves are what prior editions termed wood elves.  Well, how do the 2 elf races look at each other?  Do Eladrin see themselves as the law-abiding, civilized types and the Elves are uncouth and untrustworthy?  Borrowing from Chris Rock (and made appropriate to the conversation): "An Eladrin didn't steal your TV, an ELF stole your TV!"


----------



## Umbran (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I disagree.  I think I can pretty easily say that.
> 
> How can a character's race not be relevant?




I'll take a real but somewhat extreme example first to demonstrate the point:  You are playing _Paranoia_ - the character's skin color means _absolutely nothing_.  There are no cultural biases in the game setting based upon skin color.  It is irrelevant to the game.

Or maybe you're playing _Tales From the Floating Vagabond_ - a game which centers around a bar that has a doorway to all possible universes, so that the bar is populated with such a variety that you cannot swing a dead cat without hitting a species you've never seen before.  In such a game, it is not unreasonable for the GM and players to consider that the population of that bar really doesn't care about what species you are.

In some other games, certain forms of "race" matter, while others do not.  For example: _Shadowrun_.  It matters if you are a human, an orc, or an elf.  But, with only a couple exceptions, skin color means nothing - once you're a troll, being Asian, Caucasian, or African descent is not relevant.

In general, a character's race will be irrelevant if it does not significantly impact their choice of actions, or how others react to them.  Whether or not it is relevant cannot be judged in general - it is specific to the socio-politics of the individual campaign.


----------



## keterys (Sep 18, 2009)

Don't a lot of half-elves effectively try to blend in with another race?

I'm surprised that it wouldn't come up before that, with the half-elf 1/encounter power, but as a half-elf I don't see much reason to push his race to the forefront.


----------



## Akaiku (Sep 18, 2009)

As an aside on the "You are a ___? Really?" thing, I have a character with a picture and everything that the GM keeps forgetting the gender of... I blame Serenity.


----------



## Storminator (Sep 18, 2009)

SSquirrel said:


> You know, speaking of Chris Rock....ok, time to paraphrase   Eladrin are basically the snooty high elves and elves are what prior editions termed wood elves.  Well, how do the 2 elf races look at each other?  Do Eladrin see themselves as the law-abiding, civilized types and the Elves are uncouth and untrustworthy?  Borrowing from Chris Rock (and made appropriate to the conversation): "An Eladrin didn't steal your TV, an ELF stole your TV!"




In those same podcasts someone calls Wheaton's character an elf and he says (I paraphrase) "I'm an eladrin. Elves are our hill-billy cousins."

PS


----------



## tuxgeo (Sep 18, 2009)

SSquirrel said:


> . . .  Eladrin are basically the snooty high elves and elves are what prior editions termed wood elves.  Well, how do the 2 elf races look at each other?  Do Eladrin see themselves as the law-abiding, civilized types and the Elves are uncouth and untrustworthy?



According to the 4E PHB, "the two races hold each other in high regard" (page 39). This suggests to me that Eladrin would think of Elves as being simple and mundane yet still trustworthy, while Elves would think of Eladrin as being complicated and exotic yet still trustworthy. 
If anything, I would think that Eladrin are more Chaotic than Elves, not more Law-abiding; but this may be due to impressions that I got from earlier editions (with all of the Seldarine being either Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral). 
(Of course, all players are free to play Elf and Eladrin characters however they wish.)


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 18, 2009)

I was just kind of throwing something out there Tux, I have no real attachment to how they are setup.  They likely are more chaotic, this happens when you are the decadent higher class who believes laws are made for those who can't govern themselves.  At least, that could be one way of looking out of an Eladrin's eyes.  

That is really funny tho Storm.  City elf, country elf.


----------



## Jack99 (Sep 18, 2009)

Storminator said:


> In those same podcasts someone calls Wheaton's character an elf and he says (I paraphrase) "I'm an eladrin. Elves are our hill-billy cousins."
> 
> PS




I am so going to use that IMC.


----------



## malraux (Sep 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> How can a character's race not be relevant?
> 
> Really.  How can it not have ever come up?  Isn't a character's species about as relevant as its gender and, at the very least, general appearance?




The problem here is that, by the standard definition of species, elves, half-elves and humans are all the same species.


----------



## Leatherhead (Sep 19, 2009)

malraux said:


> The problem here is that, by the standard definition of species, elves, half-elves and humans are all the same species.




One of the reasons I dislike half-races. Especially when you get headaches such as orcs and humans being able to mate, elves and humans can mate, but elves and orcs can't.

I know, "it's magic." But the entire purpose of magics existence is to do the impossible.


----------



## Dire Bare (Sep 19, 2009)

malraux said:


> The problem here is that, by the standard definition of species, elves, half-elves and humans are all the same species.




Species is a scientific designation to classify living organisms, and like everything in science, isn't as ironclad as some like to think it is.  Race is a social construct to help people classify "others" and therefore making it easier to deal with them (i.e. stereotypes).

None of that really matters when it comes to D&D races, which are fictional and don't quite match either concept . . . actually kind of fall inbetween.  D&D looks at races from a fictional and mythic point of view, and it works fine for the game and the fiction it is based on (and the fiction based on it!).

However, it is beyond silly to criticize someone for not playing an elf "correctly".  Or even to criticize someone for not roleplaying a black person "correctly".  I have black friends who live up to the stereotypes _in some ways_ . . . and I have black friends who, if you closed your eyes, you would never know their "race".  But, maybe, they aren't doing a very good job of being "black".  I hope they never roll up an elf or half-elf in one of my games!  _(heavy sarcasm)_


----------



## Umbran (Sep 19, 2009)

Leatherhead said:


> Especially when you get headaches such as orcs and humans being able to mate, elves and humans can mate, but elves and orcs can't.




Penguins.

As you go around the shore of the continent of Antarctica, there's a series of colonies of one type of penguin.  Colony A can breed with Colony B.  Colony B can breed with colony C, and so on around the continent.  But by the time you've come full circle, you find that Colony Z _cannot successfully breed_ with colony A!

If you wiped out several colonies in the middle (say, K through Q), you'd say there were two closely related species.  But in this case, there is a continuous chain of successful breeding - though the two populations at the ends cannot interbreed, it is not possible to draw a clear line between them as species.

Which is to say, genetics is not, in general, transitive.  And if the natural world can and does provide us with a matching analogy, we should not complain about it overmuch in our fantasy fiction.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 21, 2009)

/snip

Never post when grumpy.  Apologies.

Needless to say, I find the idea that people would defend this sort of play to be very strange.  I play RPG's to play a role.  Part of that includes whatever race my character is, whether it's a real world race/ethnicity/whatever, or a fictional one.  Now, it doesn't have to be the front and center part, but, it is a part of that role.  In my mind, I would consider it rather insulting if another player turned to me and said, "You're a what?  Since when?"  I would consider that a pretty big fail on my part.

Hey, whatever floats your boat.  It doesn't float mine.


----------



## Starbuck_II (Sep 21, 2009)

Hussar said:


> However, is there ever a point in time when you honestly turned to one of your black friends and said, "Dude, you're BLACK!???! Since when???"



I've said that to my asian friends in Real life. I thought he was just tanned different.


----------



## SSquirrel (Sep 21, 2009)

Dire Bare said:


> I have black friends who live up to the stereotypes _in some ways_ . . . and I have black friends who, if you closed your eyes, you would never know their "race".




I grew up on the Ohio/Kentucky border and one of the guys in my D&D group was black.  It was commonly noted that William was (speaking in stereotypical terms) was one of the "whitest" guys in school, while one of the "blackest" was a white guy.  I know exactly what you mean


----------



## Leatherhead (Sep 22, 2009)

Umbran said:


> Penguins.




I did not know of that.


----------



## Nightson (Sep 22, 2009)

Leatherhead said:


> I did not know of that.




Ring species - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ring Species are the technical name and they are very cool.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Sep 22, 2009)

I've found that many people that "play up" a "racial" role in D&D end up being like the fantasy equivalent of Carlos Mencia.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Sep 22, 2009)

Gentlegamer said:


> I've found that many people that "play up" a "racial" role in D&D end up being like the fantasy equivalent of Carlos Mencia.



They say dialogue from other players?


----------



## Gentlegamer (Sep 22, 2009)

Kwalish Kid said:


> They say dialogue from other players?



In a "racial" accent.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 28, 2009)

Well, bringing this back to 4e for a second.  I'll quote from the half-elf section of the PHB:



			
				4e PHB page 43 said:
			
		

> Half-elves usually adopt the dress and hairstyles of the society they spend the most time with... However, it would not be unusual for half-elves raised among humans to seek out articles of elven clthing or jewelry so that they can proudly display signs of their dual heritage.




Now, again, I'm not saying that there is only one way to do this.  But the PBH actually gives you a way, right in the racial description, of defining your character's race at the game table.  I mentioned, even before I read this passage, looking for a proper tailor.  That sort of thing.

Yes, Gentlegamer, you're entirely right.  There certainly are bad ways to portray a given race.  Fine.  But, that doens't mean that there aren't good ways as well.  To me, even a bad "racial accent" is better than nothing.  Again, at least you are letting the other players at the table know what you are.  If you do nothing, give no indication of the particulars of your character, that's a poor portrayal of a character IME.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 28, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Well, bringing this back to 4e for a second.  I'll quote from the half-elf section of the PHB:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, again, I'm not saying that there is only one way to do this.  But the PBH actually gives you a way, right in the racial description, of defining your character's race at the game table.




And right there, in the same quote, it tells you that you *don't have to* - that many typical half-elves will talk, dress and act exactly like their adoptive culture. Why are you against people playing one of those half-elves?


----------



## Hussar (Sep 30, 2009)

MarkB said:


> And right there, in the same quote, it tells you that you *don't have to* - that many typical half-elves will talk, dress and act exactly like their adoptive culture. Why are you against people playing one of those half-elves?




Because, what's the point?  Why be a half-elf if no one actually knows it?  Why not just play a human if that's what you're going to play anyway?

If your character acts human (or I suppose Elven, although that's generally not the problem), dresses human, and is in every way human, why doesn't it say "human" on the character sheet.

Oh right, number bonuses.  Go go powergaming.  Can't be a human if I want to multiclass, so, guess I'll just act human, no one will know the difference and I'll just write half elf on the old character sheet.

It's the worst kind of role playing.  You're not actually PLAYING the role you have.  The player is giving no indication, no information to anyone at the table that allows the other players to have an accurate image of his character.  Everyone else thinks that PC is human.  They are caught completely by surprise by the revelation that he isn't human, when the characters should know this information.  It shouldn't EVER be a surprise.

((Unless, of course, it's deliberate - that's a whole 'nother ball of wax, but, we're not talking about that))

The character is being played so poorly, portrayed in such a manner that lacks any indication of what the character actually is, not because of some deeper plot involvement, but because the player is too lazy to bother putting the thirty seconds of effort it takes to differentiate himself from the guy standing next to him.

And you guys are applauding this.  That's what totally blows my mind.  That this isn't seen as a bad thing.


----------



## malraux (Sep 30, 2009)

Hussar said:


> The character is being played so poorly, portrayed in such a manner that lacks any indication of what the character actually is, not because of some deeper plot involvement, but because the player is too lazy to bother putting the thirty seconds of effort it takes to differentiate himself from the guy standing next to him.




Omin is quite different from jim darkmagic, aoefel, and binwin.  Everyone knows he is a cleric, and leader of AI.  His personality is pretty well developed.  And you are upset because he hasn't taken a few minutes to take time from the adventure to go shopping for hairclips?

I'm astounded that you think that a near human would act that much different from a human, or that you think the default for the game should be human.  Moreover that you see playing a half-elf as powergaming.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 30, 2009)

Malraux - first off, while it was Omin's thing that started all of this, don't get too tied into that specific example.  This is something I've seen for years.

Second, "leader of AI"?  Isn't that Binwin?  Meh, I could easily be wrong there.

"Near human"?  Huh?  He's not human.  Near human is kinda like "near pregnant".  

Again, for the bloody umpteenth time, I'm not saying he has to act "that much different".  I'm saying he should spend THIRTY FREAKING SECONDS making sure that the other players actually know that he isn't human.  That he should make the barest effort to ensure that "Huh?  You're a half-elf?  Since when" is not uttered at the table, just like it is at pretty much every table I've ever played at whenever someone is playing an elf or a half-elf.

As far as power-gaming, what else would you call it?  Choosing a particular option, not because you have any in game role playing reason, but solely for the mechanical bonuses it brings is the very definition of power gaming.  When you (and I mean this in the non-specific, general "you") chose an option for your character for the sole purpose of a bonus, what else can you call it?  

Lastly, "you think the default for the game should be human".  Buh?  Huh what?  Where did I say that.  I said that if you are not going to play your character as anything other than human, you should play a human.  If your character is played in such a way that no one knows what he is, the default assumption of pretty much every player is that he's human.  After all, if that wasn't the assumption, then no one would be surprised when it turns out that he isn't human.

Again, for the bazillionth time, and I think this is where I get off here because people are far more interested in nit picking than actually discussing, if you cannot be bothered putting in thirty seconds of effort into defining a very obvious physical element of your character, that's bad role playing.  If the portrayal of the character is so lacking in any evidence to the rest of the table that they are caught by surprise when your race is revealed, then that's entirely on the player's head.


----------



## malraux (Sep 30, 2009)

Hussar said:


> "Near human"?  Huh?  He's not human.  Near human is kinda like "near pregnant".



No, he's half human.  That's near human.  And given the oddities of inter-species genetics, he could well be 3/4 human and raised in a human home.



Hussar said:


> Again, for the bloody umpteenth time, I'm not saying he has to act "that much different".  I'm saying he should spend THIRTY FREAKING SECONDS making sure that the other players actually know that he isn't human.  That he should make the barest effort to ensure that "Huh?  You're a half-elf?  Since when" is not uttered at the table, just like it is at pretty much every table I've ever played at whenever someone is playing an elf or a half-elf.



In 4e, elves are pretty noticeable.  They have a distinct racial power, elven reroll.  Mechanically, they stand out.  Half-elves and humans do not have distinct racial power.  They have an extra class power instead.  It isn't something that would be apparent quickly, especially in an occational campaign like the podcast once.  Remember, they've only had 3 sessions with tight time constraints.  There isn't space for detailed RP.  That said, it only takes one minute, 30 seconds for the fact that Omin is a half-elf to be mentioned.



Hussar said:


> As far as power-gaming, what else would you call it?  Choosing a particular option, not because you have any in game role playing reason, but solely for the mechanical bonuses it brings is the very definition of power gaming.  When you (and I mean this in the non-specific, general "you") chose an option for your character for the sole purpose of a bonus, what else can you call it?



At the start, you have to pick a race.  If you just don't care about race, you still have to pick a race.  Powergaming would be something like picking a minotaur.  It implies picking the most powerful option out there, but the PHB races are all pretty balanced, at least relative to the MM races.  



Hussar said:


> Lastly, "you think the default for the game should be human".  Buh?  Huh what?  Where did I say that.  I said that if you are not going to play your character as anything other than human, you should play a human.  If your character is played in such a way that no one knows what he is, the default assumption of pretty much every player is that he's human.  After all, if that wasn't the assumption, then no one would be surprised when it turns out that he isn't human.
> 
> Again, for the bazillionth time, and I think this is where I get off here because people are far more interested in nit picking than actually discussing, if you cannot be bothered putting in thirty seconds of effort into defining a very obvious physical element of your character, that's bad role playing.  If the portrayal of the character is so lacking in any evidence to the rest of the table that they are caught by surprise when your race is revealed, then that's entirely on the player's head.




Again, its not like this is a weekly campaign.  The evidence could be clear in the first session, but that was months ago.


----------



## MrMyth (Sep 30, 2009)

Hussar said:


> And you guys are applauding this.  That's what totally blows my mind.  That this isn't seen as a bad thing.




Someone playing the game the way he and his friends enjoy it? Yeah, that isn't a bad thing. Condemning someone else for not playing the way you want? That is _absolutely_ a bad thing. 

Even worse is the fact that you think there is a problem playing a half-elf who doesn't make a big deal of his heritage - whether because they have embraced their human side, or simply because they don't feel the need to make their race the most prominent aspect of their character. 

I haven't listened to all the podcasts, but the sense I get? His character's _class_ is a far more defining feature to him than his race. That is where a lot of his motivation and personality lies. And thus, race becomes less material besides his religious focus. 

Should he also be taking to task for not talking more about his parents? Or where he came from? Or any number of other myriad details? No one is required to hit some sort of checklist of information they need to unload on other players. There is no "you must be this tall to play D&D" requirement. A player builds a character they want to play. They share that player with their friends. If they don't focus on the details that are less important to them, that does not in any way make them a bad roleplaying, or a bad gamer, or somehow _less worthy than you_ to play D&D. 

To claim otherwise is a fundamentally flawed outlook, and one I am definitely glad I don't have to deal with among my friends, in our games. 

The irony, here? The only other criticism I've seen of the podcasts - on a thread in the WotC forums - is that the players don't worry too much about the rules, and occasionally make mistakes or run things incorrectly. And that holds just as little weight, in the end. 

They are concerned about having fun by playing a game with their friends. They enjoy being part of a shared story experience, enjoy seeing their characters in action - defeating the villain, saving the day, the usual D&D experience. The fact that they don't meet some other groups arbitrary requirements for how to play? Irrelevant.

They are the ones playing, and as long as they are having fun, they are clearly doing it _right_.


----------



## Voadam (Sep 30, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Again, for the bazillionth time, and I think this is where I get off here because people are far more interested in nit picking than actually discussing, if you cannot be bothered putting in thirty seconds of effort into defining a very obvious physical element of your character, that's bad role playing.  If the portrayal of the character is so lacking in any evidence to the rest of the table that they are caught by surprise when your race is revealed, then that's entirely on the player's head.




Obvious physical element? You mean their tapered ears? Is there another physical element that all half elves have that could not be visually identical to a human's?

Didn't Tanis half-elven conceal his half-elven nature in the Dragonlance books simply by growing his hair long enough to cover the tops of his ears?

I can see going the other way as well.

How different is the half human spock from other vulcans?

How different is the half human Elrond from other elves?


----------



## malraux (Sep 30, 2009)

Voadam said:


> How different is the half human Elrond from other elves?




Wait, elrond is half human?


----------



## RefinedBean (Sep 30, 2009)

malraux said:


> Wait, elrond is half human?




Yeah, it's a bit of a surprise, isn't it?

Unfortunately, Hussar wasn't around in Tolkien's time to tell him how to truly emphasize that part of the character.


----------



## Voadam (Sep 30, 2009)

malraux said:


> Wait, elrond is half human?




Sort of. I guess to be technically correct I should have said how is Elrond Half-Elven not like an elf.


----------



## Voadam (Sep 30, 2009)

More on Tolkien half elves here.


----------



## Primal (Oct 1, 2009)

Hussar, don't even go and read the 'How much reflavoring is too much?'-thread on the WoTC forums; the general consensus over there seems to be that it's okay to "reflavor" every aspect of the mechanics. For example, imagine a human warrior wielding a dagger and a longsword, and who also has a bad breath that stuns his opponents; mechanically this character is actually a dragonborn barbarian wielding a bloodclaw greataxe. 

Personally, I don't care if someone allows stuff like this in his games... we all have different tastes and preferences. However, I don't allow such reflavoring (especially if it's clearly for powergaming's sake, such as the third character wielding a bloodclaw weapon, only reskinned as something else) at my table, and I expect that to be fine, too. 

As for half-elves, it's not far-fetched to expect that at least some of them resemble and embrace more their human half , and therefore may not be automatically recognised at first glance as half-elves (Tanis, for example). However, I agree that you could assume your friends would know it, unless the character is actually something like 10% elf/90% human (although such a character would mechanically be, in my opinion, human and not half-elf).


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Oct 1, 2009)

"Actually, to be honest, I'm kind off embarrassed of my elven heritage. All that wind chime, leafy garments and eating honey-seed cake stuff is lame. And don't even get me started on those pretentious, poncy eldarin. That's why I wear a hat over my ears.

yeah, sure my father may have been an Elf, but I like human things. Greasy roasted racks of ribs, greased pigs contests at the faire, big-breasted serving wenches, hunting doves, big spiked skull crushing maces, that's the kind of human stuff I enjoy! Human style, all the way, that's me. I like to say that my ears are half-elven, but I'm 100% human inside!"


----------



## UndeadScottsman (Oct 1, 2009)

It's been mentioned before, but I'll repeat it again.  The reason Omin is a half-elf is because he's one of the "Keep on the Shadowfell" precreated characters.  It wasn't really a active choice on Tycho's part, and I'd be willing to bet he picked the character more for the class than the race.  As such, it's probably not a huge part of the character, so it doesn't get mentioned much.

'course the problem got compounded by the fact that Scott and Gabe keep drawing him with human ears, but whatever.



> Second, "leader of AI"? Isn't that Binwin? Meh, I could easily be wrong there.



I'm not sure how you could have missed that. They repeatedly refer to Omin as the CEO of AI, and Wheaton's character continually calls him "boss."


----------



## malraux (Oct 1, 2009)

UndeadScottsman said:


> I'm not sure how you could have missed that. They repeatedly refer to Omin as the CEO of AI, and Wheaton's character continually calls him "boss."




Which, incidentally, is far more "half-elfish" in 4e than talking about hairclips.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 1, 2009)

Hussar said:


> "Near human"?  Huh?  He's not human.  Near human is kinda like "near pregnant".



No, it's nothing like that.  Humans and Half-Elves are separated only by pointy ears and a couple small other physical differences depending on the edition.  They are about as close as 2 different humans are.



Hussar said:


> Again, for the bloody umpteenth time, I'm not saying he has to act "that much different".  I'm saying he should spend THIRTY FREAKING SECONDS making sure that the other players actually know that he isn't human.  That he should make the barest effort to ensure that "Huh?  You're a half-elf?  Since when" is not uttered at the table, just like it is at pretty much every table I've ever played at whenever someone is playing an elf or a half-elf.



I agree that someone should have spent 30 seconds when people met them to say "I have pointy ears", but other than physical differences, I see no reason to mention it again.  If people weren't listening, and they decided to ask later "You're a half-elf?", then really that's their fault.



Hussar said:


> As far as power-gaming, what else would you call it?  Choosing a particular option, not because you have any in game role playing reason, but solely for the mechanical bonuses it brings is the very definition of power gaming.  When you (and I mean this in the non-specific, general "you") chose an option for your character for the sole purpose of a bonus, what else can you call it?



I call in gaming.  In the same way I don't begrudge someone for using a get out of jail free card in a Monopoly game instead of serving his time for the full duration like a proper "roleplayer" would do, I don't begrudge people making good decisions in the game of D&D.

Also, it's been said before, but you CAN'T Roleplay during character creation.  You don't have a character yet, so you can't decide anything from his point of view.  You don't look at your character sheet and ask yourself "What race would a blank character sheet be if it had the choice?".  You instead say "What class do I feel like playing?  What race would go well with that choice of class?"  That's a normal part of playing the game.  Playing a Half-Elf Bard in 4e is simply a good choice.  I'm certainly not going to claim that a player should have been Human instead because they had no reason other than mechanical ones to choose Half-Elf.  Rather, it's the other way around, they had no reason at all to play a Human.



Hussar said:


> Lastly, "you think the default for the game should be human".  Buh?  Huh what?  Where did I say that.  I said that if you are not going to play your character as anything other than human, you should play a human.  If your character is played in such a way that no one knows what he is, the default assumption of pretty much every player is that he's human.  After all, if that wasn't the assumption, then no one would be surprised when it turns out that he isn't human.



I think that's a problem with the players involved.  I don't assume anyone is human.  If I haven't had any hints as to someone's race, I just assume that they could be ANY race.  If anything, I assume they are one of the races that has the best stats for their class.  After all...why wouldn't they?



Hussar said:


> if you cannot be bothered putting in thirty seconds of effort into defining a very obvious physical element of your character, that's bad role playing.  If the portrayal of the character is so lacking in any evidence to the rest of the table that they are caught by surprise when your race is revealed, then that's entirely on the player's head.



I think sometimes the roleplaying simply doesn't focus on that.  We've had campaigns where we met each other in a situation where we had to immediately jump into action because there was a battle underway.  We gave a brief description of ourselves, but didn't have time to talk.  We then found out that there were a bunch of people kidnapped in the battle and immediately decided to go look for them.  We were on a deadline, no time to chit-chat about whose ears were longer, who liked beer, whose clothes didn't fit, or who had elven jewelry.  We'd then get caught up on quest after quest, always in a rush.  Sometimes it wouldn't be until session 5 or 6 when I'd know someone's race.  No big deal.  It's just one part of their character.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 2, 2009)

Primal said:


> Hussar, don't even go and read the 'How much reflavoring is too much?'-thread on the WoTC forums; the general consensus over there seems to be that it's okay to "reflavor" every aspect of the mechanics. For example, imagine a human warrior wielding a dagger and a longsword, and who also has a bad breath that stuns his opponents; mechanically this character is actually a dragonborn barbarian wielding a bloodclaw greataxe.
> 
> Personally, I don't care if someone allows stuff like this in his games... we all have different tastes and preferences. However, I don't allow such reflavoring (especially if it's clearly for powergaming's sake, such as the third character wielding a bloodclaw weapon, only reskinned as something else) at my table, and I expect that to be fine, too.
> 
> As for half-elves, it's not far-fetched to expect that at least some of them resemble and embrace more their human half , and therefore may not be automatically recognised at first glance as half-elves (Tanis, for example). However, I agree that you could assume your friends would know it, unless the character is actually something like 10% elf/90% human (although such a character would mechanically be, in my opinion, human and not half-elf).





Whoa.  Hang on a tick.  I have no problems with re-flavoring.  That's groovy.  My problem is with having no flavor at all.

People keep bringing up Tanis.  When you read the books, were you ever surprised that Tanis was half-elven?  Were any of the other PC's ever surprised that Tanis was half-elven?  At any point in time, was the fact that Tanis wasn't human EVER at doubt?

No.  It wasn't.  Same with Elrond.  Everyone knows that Elrond is Half-Elven because that his freakin' name.  

That's all I want.  Just the simple recognition.  It doesn't have to be chest beating "I am KLINGON" all the time.  Spock is half-Vulcan, but, the fact that he's NOT HUMAN is brought up by other characters all the time.  It's one of the defining elements of that character.

If you reflavor your half-elf to be something else.  Fine.  But, make the thirty seconds of effort to make sure that the other people at the table KNOW what you are.



Blair Goatsblood said:


> "Actually, to be honest, I'm kind off embarrassed of my elven heritage. All that wind chime, leafy garments and eating honey-seed cake stuff is lame. And don't even get me started on those pretentious, poncy eldarin. That's why I wear a hat over my ears.
> 
> yeah, sure my father may have been an Elf, but I like human things. Greasy roasted racks of ribs, greased pigs contests at the faire, big-breasted serving wenches, hunting doves, big spiked skull crushing maces, that's the kind of human stuff I enjoy! Human style, all the way, that's me. I like to say that my ears are half-elven, but I'm 100% human inside!"




BINGO!  Done.  That's all it takes.  Thirty seconds, you've established your character's race and given a great little roleplaying hook for the other players to bounce off of, particularly in a group where you have another elf type (or eladrin as the case may be).  

Well done you sir.


----------



## malraux (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> No.  It wasn't.  Same with Elrond.  Everyone knows that Elrond is Half-Elven because that his freakin' name.




Ummm, I had no idea.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 2, 2009)

Did you, at any point in time, think he was human?


----------



## garyh (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Did you, at any point in time, think he was human?




How is assuming Elrond is an elf (which is exactly how he acts) any better than assuming Elrond is a human?


----------



## Hussar (Oct 2, 2009)

Because at least it's not an assumption of the standard.  

But, ignoring that one example for a second, did you at any point in the LOTR think that:

Frodo, Sam, Pippin or Merry were not hobbits?
Legolas wasn't an elf?
Gimli wasn't a dwarf?
Aragorn or Boromir wasn't human?

Making a minor mistake on a bit character that appears for a chapter or two in a pretty lengthy book is one thing.  Making a mistake on a main character is a whole different level.  

About the only one you could really make the claim for is Gandalf.  I'll freely admit that if you never read the Simiralian, you'd have no idea that he wasn't human.  Then again, I have no problem saying that that's a mistake on Tolkien's part.  Neglecting to mention that one of your main characters is a quasi-immortal angel is a pretty big oversight IMO. But, meh, he's a DMPC anyway, so whatever.

Can you name a single movie or novel that you've seen where the species of a protagonist came as a surprise?  Where you learned that X was something and you went, "Buh?  What?  Since when?"  ((Again, excepting of course when that's a plot point.))


----------



## malraux (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Can you name a single movie or novel that you've seen where the species of a protagonist came as a surprise?  Where you learned that X was something and you went, "Buh?  What?  Since when?"  ((Again, excepting of course when that's a plot point.))




Well, as you mention, both elrond and gandolf are not of their apparent race, yet that seems to not matter one whit in the books; moreover, since there isn't a dramatic reveal, you can't even count that as a plot point.  But half-elves and humans are not two separate species, as they interbreed and produce viable offspring.  Moreover, half-elves and humans live in the same communities, grow up the same, and live as humans with slightly pointy ears.  It is only in settings like Eberron where the mixed races breed true and have their own distinct culture.

edit: oh and harrison ford's character in blade runner.


----------



## Voadam (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Because at least it's not an assumption of the standard.
> 
> But, ignoring that one example for a second, did you at any point in the LOTR think that:
> 
> ...




Gandalf, whatever.

I'm trying to remember whether Riddick in Pitch Black is supposed to be human or not. I thought so in the first movie but in the second they make a big deal that he is an X and introduce the elementals who have invisibility and air walking which could imply nonhuman.


----------



## Voadam (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Aragorn or Boromir wasn't human?




How old was Aragorn again?


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Oct 2, 2009)

Voadam said:


> How old was Aragorn again?



Indeed. In a D&D translation of Tolkein, one could quite plausibly have the Dunedain as a population of half-elves like those in Eberron.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Because at least it's not an assumption of the standard.
> 
> But, ignoring that one example for a second




Why? Why should we ignore that example? 

The point is, Elrond being a half-elf _is_ a fundamental element of his character, and makes him something essentially unique in Middle-earth. It also is almost entirely irrelevant to the story going on around him - which is why so many read the books and never even realize his background. They see him as a leader of the elves, because that is actually what matters in the story. They see him as the father of Arwen. As a member of the White Council. 

Now, if it is fine for race to take a back-seat in a story, it shouldn't only be more-so for a roleplaying game, where the shared narrative story is motivated not to entertain an audience, but to entertain and be enjoyed by _the players_.

You say your problem is with 'having no flavor at all'. But we're talking about Tycho, who is all about the roleplaying. His character has plenty of flavor - it just happens to be that the half-elf element isn't the part of the flavor he is most concerned about. 

We already know that he didn't choose half-elf for powergaming reasons - it was a pregenerated character. Do you really feel that him focusing on his class as a defining element rather than his race makes him a 'bad roleplayer'? Do you honestly believe that someone is a worse gamer because they don't make a big deal about their race?


----------



## garyh (Oct 2, 2009)

What Mr. Myth, Kwalish Kid, Voadam, and malraux said.  

Plus, I just don't assume characters in a D&D/LotR-ish fantasy world are human.  Why would I?  It's known the world is full of strange things.

I really don't see why it's so important to play up the elf part of the half-elf.  I don't have a problem if someone plays a half-elf as an elf with a beard, a human with pointy ears, a drama-filled Tanis clone, a prominent member of House Lyrander, or whatever.  And if the fact that their half-elf is a cleric of Ioun is the most important part of the character, and that's in the forefront of how they portray them, it's still perfectly good roleplaying.


----------



## Brian Gibbons (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Can you name a single movie or novel that you've seen where the species of a protagonist came as a surprise?  Where you learned that X was something and you went, "Buh?  What?  Since when?




Not precisely the same, but the first thing that came to mind was Heinlein, who would occasionally have protagonists whose skin color was never mentioned and who most readers just assumed were white, but were in fact of another race.  (The main character in Starship Troopers was Filipino, for example, and the main character of Tunnel in the Sky was African-American.  Neither's race was ever mentioned and it had no real effect on the story; you'd have to be paying attention to subtle clues to pick up on it.)


----------



## MarkB (Oct 2, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Because at least it's not an assumption of the standard.
> 
> But, ignoring that one example for a second, did you at any point in the LOTR think that:
> 
> ...




For what it's worth, I thought Merry was female throughout my entire first read-through of the trilogy.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 3, 2009)

malraux said:


> /snip
> edit: oh and harrison ford's character in blade runner.




He's human.  Which is exactly what he's been made out to be throughout the movie.

And, on the Tolkien examples, let's be honest here, Tolkien's strengths are not in his characterizations.  



			
				MrMyth said:
			
		

> You say your problem is with 'having no flavor at all'. But we're talking about Tycho, who is all about the roleplaying. His character has plenty of flavor - it just happens to be that the half-elf element isn't the part of the flavor he is most concerned about.




Yes, the character does have lots of flavor.  And, to be honest, I'd rather not get too caught up in the specific example, since it was an example, not the entirety of my point.  My point being, I do not think that it is too much to ask a player to spend thirty seconds, as has been shown in this thread alone, establishing a basic element of the character for the other players.

Again, it's not about chest beating or constantly bringing it up.  It's about passing along pretty elementary information in such a way that the rest of the party knows what's what.  No one has turned to Binwin's player and said, "Dude, you're a dwarf?  Really?"  Wil Wheaton has the great line of "Don't call me an elf.  Elves are our country cousins."  Perfect.  That's ALL it takes.

One line.  

Wow, I'm such a bastard for asking for so much effort from my players.  I guess expecting a single line of role play is just too much for some people.


----------



## Dire Bare (Oct 3, 2009)

Hussar, you're just going to have to accept that you know better than us and we're all fools who don't understand what roleplaying is all about.  The lone voice in the wilderness must be correct.


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 3, 2009)

Hussar said:


> He's human.  Which is exactly what he's been made out to be throughout the movie.




Not according to Mr. Ridley Scott. You know, the guy who directed the movie...


			
				NY TIMES said:
			
		

> The film’s theme of dehumanization has also been sharpened. What has been a matter of speculation and debate is now a certainty: Deckard, the replicant-hunting cop, is himself a replicant. Mr. Scott confirmed this: “Yes, he’s a replicant. He was always a replicant.”




LINK TO NY TIMES ARTICLE


----------



## Hussar (Oct 3, 2009)

Look, is it really that difficult?

We know that Omin is a priest of Avandra (sp).  How do we know this?  Because he brings it up fairly often.  He prays to his goddess.  Fantastic role play.  Really brings the character to life.

But, in this area, he fell down.  He didn't convey a fairly important element of his character to the other players.  IME, this is pretty common with elf players and it bugs the heck out of me.

I'm asking players to spend a couple of seconds every once in a while establishing character elements during the game.  I still don't understand why elf players consistently fail to do this, but, hey, whatever floats your boat.  

Jack99 - Author intention is meaningless.  It's always nice when you can go back, rewrite the story, and change things.  Dekker is only a Replicant in one version of the story.  He certainly isn't in the Phillip K Dick story.  Scott may like rewriting history, but, meh, Lucasing a story so it follows your own point of view is weaksauce at best.


----------



## garyh (Oct 3, 2009)

As has been said, in this specific case, the character is a half-elf because that's what the pre-gen was.  I would not assume the half-elfness was the reason the character was picked, or that it's a major facet of the character.

How many pre-gens came with that module?  Was the half-elf cleric the only leader?


----------



## Merkuri (Oct 3, 2009)

This thread is making me think about when I read I Am Legend.  As often happens with me, when the movie came out and they were advertising it everywhere it made me want to read the book, so I went out and snagged a copy before seeing the movie.  Though I hadn't actually seen the movie yet I couldn't help but imagine the protagonist as looking like Will Smith.  Boy, was it really jarring when, towards the end of the book, they described the protagonist as having grown a thick BLOND beard.  That was the first time it had occurred to me that the protagonist was white.  They may have described him as blond in the very beginning, but my internal image of Will Smith was stronger than the short description the book had given pages and pages ago.

To some people, race is just a cosmetic thing about their character.  They don't feel like exploring the edges of humanity by playing something non-human, they just liked the pointy ears.  

I've been guilty of this.  One time I had the urge to play a kobold bard just because I liked the idea of a little lizardish creature, dressed up in a wide-brimmed hat with a feather, jumping around and playing the fiddle.  There was no deeper motivation there.  I was actually prepared to be the brunt of mistrust because of my race and was eager to climb that roleplaying mountain, but it just never came up probably due to the fact that we were playing the World's Largest Dungeon and by the time my character appeared the group's theory was "strength in numbers - if they don't attack us they can join us."  

Hussar was actually the DM for this game and he asked me on at least one occasion why I didn't just play a halfling if I wanted a short charismatic fiddle-player.  The answer was, I just wanted a kobold this time.

That might not have been exactly what Hussar was talking about, since I'm pretty sure everybody in the group new I was a kobold, but my choice of being a kobold in that game was about on the same level as the choice of her wearing a floppy wide-brimmed hat with a feather.  And probably on the same level as her being a HER, actually.  I wouldn't have been surprised with that character if some player had turned to me and said, "Wait, the kobold's a she?"  Her gender just wasn't very important to her character.

I think it's less important to make sure people know your race than it is to make sure people know your character and can tell the difference between your character and everyone else's character.  If your race is part of that identity, fine.  If it's not, that's fine as well.

This is all assuming you're playing with people who value roleplaying and getting into character, of course.  If you're playing a game with a bunch of tacticians who don't even remember their own characters' names because that isn't why they play, then that's a whole different story.


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 3, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Jack99 - Author intention is meaningless.  It's always nice when you can go back, rewrite the story, and change things.  Dekker is only a Replicant in one version of the story.  He certainly isn't in the Phillip K Dick story.  Scott may like rewriting history, but, meh, Lucasing a story so it follows your own point of view is weaksauce at best.




Well, when people refer to Blade Runner, I am willing to bet that most if not almost all refer to the movie, not to the book. Especially when you consider that the book is called Do Androids dream of electric sheep (or something, I only know the Danish title) instead of Blade Runner. So when you mention "Blade Runner", people have no way of knowing that you are referring to something where Ridley Scott's vision is not relevant.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Oct 5, 2009)

Merkuri said:


> ...we were playing the World's Largest Dungeon...
> 
> Hussar was actually the DM for this game...




So how was the roleplaying in this character driven adventure?


----------



## Merkuri (Oct 5, 2009)

Blair Goatsblood said:


> So how was the roleplaying in this character driven adventure?




It was mixed.   Obviously this was not a high-RP-style game, but those of us who enjoyed that sort of thing got into our characters.  Those who didn't care... didn't.  There were some memorable characters and some that were just blips.  We also went through a TON of players that campaign so the playstyles were very mixed.

I think the most memorable character was actually two characters in one...  One player decided to play a dumb-as-bricks, hulked out orc barbarian and though he enjoyed being able to smash things to bits he started to get bored with the one-dimensional character, so Hussar decided to throw in an intelligent chaotic neutral axe that could take over the orc's body whenever it wanted to.  The orc didn't mind this in one bit, and the player was allowed to RP the axe however he wanted.  It made for some really tense negotiations when we actually came in contact with some non-hostiles (or "pre-hostiles" in some cases), since the axe's only goal seemed to be destruction and the orc was happy to play along with that.  That player had a lot of fun going between the gullible orc and the nihilistic axe.

And yes, everyone knew without a doubt that he was an orc.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Oct 5, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> Well, when people refer to Blade Runner, I am willing to bet that most if not almost all refer to the movie, not to the book. Especially when you consider that the book is called Do Androids dream of electric sheep (or something, I only know the Danish title) instead of Blade Runner. So when you mention "Blade Runner", people have no way of knowing that you are referring to something where Ridley Scott's vision is not relevant.



You got the english title right. Its _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep._ Another favorite title of mine from Dick: _We Can Remember it for You Wholesale_. (Good story too.)

Anyways. I know what you're saying Hussar, my first PC was either an elf or a half-elf (I can't remember which) solely because it allowed me to play a thief/mage in 2e. Race really didn't play a part of my role playing. In my defense, I didn't know enough about elves in D&D to do it any kind of justice.

My last PC in a long campaign was an Elf wizard and I played up the elf aspect to the hilt.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 5, 2009)

On a related note to this.  Sometimes I wish people would NOT play up the roleplaying aspects of their character.  Last night, I played in an LFR game with a guy who was playing a Dwarf Avenger.  He talked in a gruff voice all the time.  But I still had to ask him what race he was as he uses this voice for an Orc character he has, a Shifter character he has, as well as another Dwarf he plays.

But the more problematic roleplaying was that his character wanted to hunt demons.  In order to play up this part of his character, he kept yelling out "DEMONS!"  In our 5 hour long game, he probably did it about 30 times.  We were investigating some thefts that were happening at a festival.  He immediately said "Stuff is being stolen?  DEMONS!"  We got a hint that it might be some children stealing the stuff.  He said, "The children must be DEMONS!"

If it wasn't for the RPGA rules against attacking or harming other players or their characters...I was about to stab him in the face.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 6, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> Well, when people refer to Blade Runner, I am willing to bet that most if not almost all refer to the movie, not to the book. Especially when you consider that the book is called Do Androids dream of electric sheep (or something, I only know the Danish title) instead of Blade Runner. So when you mention "Blade Runner", people have no way of knowing that you are referring to something where Ridley Scott's vision is not relevant.




I would point out that the version you are talking about was released about twenty years after the original version.  In the original, Decker's race was totally not an issue.  Like I said, it's a bit of a ret-con because he's now a huge name director and can get away with it.  

But, I would also point out that this fits exactly with what I was saying.  If there is a reason for keeping the race a secret, that's one thing.  That's playing the character.  I would not expect that doppleganger spy to go around announcing his species to all and sundry and it might very well (depending on the group) be a secret from the other players.

That's groovy.  And, that's what's going on in Blade Runner.  It's the Big Reveal at the end of the movie.  Great.  Totally NOT what I'm talking about.



			
				Blair Goatsblood said:
			
		

> So how was the roleplaying in this character driven adventure?




Pass/Agg snark aside, this was the World's Largest Dungeon.  It was a pretty high hack campaign.  Yet, funnily enough, as Merk points out, I remember clearly the goblin thief at the beginning, the kobold bard, the orc barbarian, even the dwarf cleric that only lasted a couple of sessions at the beginning.

Yet, the only reason people knew the elf ninja was an elf, is because I brought it up ((more along the lines of "Where is that "%)$%$(% elf boy? He's late again?" and the fact that after we booted his backside out of the group, I killed his character in a rather gruesome way. ))  The only reason he took elf was for the Dex bonus.

In our later Savage Tide game, we had a grippli druid who played up her race all the time - climbing on stuff, riding a climbdog, funny voice.  We had a Lupin fighter that played up his race constantly.  The tiefling scout set himself on fire frequently just because he could.  The only cipher character was my own DMPC Healbot cleric and that's because, well, he was the healbot.  He wasn't there to do anything else.  'sides, he was human.

So, yeah, my players are pretty damn good.  The ones that I play with regularly anyway.  They've all made a pretty decent effort to make sure that everyone at the table knows what they are trying to portray.  Great roleplayers all and I'm really lucky to have them.



Majoru Oakheart said:


> On a related note to this.  Sometimes I wish people would NOT play up the roleplaying aspects of their character.  Last night, I played in an LFR game with a guy who was playing a Dwarf Avenger.  He talked in a gruff voice all the time.  But I still had to ask him what race he was as he uses this voice for an Orc character he has, a Shifter character he has, as well as another Dwarf he plays.
> 
> But the more problematic roleplaying was that his character wanted to hunt demons.  In order to play up this part of his character, he kept yelling out "DEMONS!"  In our 5 hour long game, he probably did it about 30 times.  We were investigating some thefts that were happening at a festival.  He immediately said "Stuff is being stolen?  DEMONS!"  We got a hint that it might be some children stealing the stuff.  He said, "The children must be DEMONS!"
> 
> If it wasn't for the RPGA rules against attacking or harming other players or their characters...I was about to stab him in the face.




Heh, well, there's always too much of a good thing.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 6, 2009)

Ok, a further thought occurs.

A while back I was playing a human cleric of Cuthbert.  Real old Testament type, fire and brimstone.  He believed that sinners should be cleansed by the fires of truth and proceeded to set fire to as many sinners as he could.  

A few levels later, I took a level in Half Fire elemental because it really fit (IMO) with the character.  He gained some fire immunity, could chuck some fire related spells and he looked like he was on fire most of the time.  Kinda like Ghost Rider without the boniness.    I played it to the hilt.  Really had a blast with the character.

After the campaign ended, one of the other players asked if my character was a genasi.  I explained no, and what had happened.

So, did I fail my own criteria?

IMO, no, I didn't.  There was no reason why my character would stop thinking of himself as human.  He gained the abilities through a ritual (not the 4e kind - an RP kind) and his faith in his god.  He was being rewarded for his fervor with a miracle.  For all intents and purposes, he still thought of himself as human.  He wasn't born this way at all.

But, on the other hand, no one at that table would think that I was just another human.  They might not know exactly by the rules what I was, but, they knew something was up.

Sometimes, yes, there are perfectly good reasons why the other players at the table might not know the exact mechanics of your character.  That's so not what I'm talking about.  If there is a good reason for why the other players don't know something, that's fine.  But, if the only reason is because the player is too lazy to actually play his or her character, then, that's poor roleplaying.

Fun or not fun doesn't enter into it.  We're talking about quality of roleplay here.  The quality of how well you portray your character.  If the four or five other people have no idea what you are, for no reason than you just didn't bother putting any effort into it, then, IMNSHO, that's poor roleplaying.

Tycho portrays a great cleric.  Fantastic.  Piss poor half elf.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Oct 6, 2009)

I'm sorry, your logic is still lacking.

Your main argument seems to be: Unless you go out of your way to be an irritating as hell stereotype and ensure everyone around you knows at all times you're _x_ race, you're a dirty power gamer.

Hey, fun fact: Maybe some elves act like humans because, holy crap, _acting like something isn't an inherent part of your race_.  Elves do not have the Haughty Jerks gene.  Dwarves are not genetically inclined to speak in bad Scottish accents.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 6, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> I'm sorry, your logic is still lacking.
> 
> Your main argument seems to be: Unless you go out of your way to be an irritating as hell stereotype and ensure everyone around you knows at all times you're _x_ race, you're a dirty power gamer.
> 
> Hey, fun fact: Maybe some elves act like humans because, holy crap, _acting like something isn't an inherent part of your race_.  Elves do not have the Haughty Jerks gene.  Dwarves are not genetically inclined to speak in bad Scottish accents.




Umm, no?

Please show me where I said that.  In fact, there are numerous places where I say the exact opposite of that.  

My main argument is, if you're going to play something, PLAY IT.  Portray it in such a way that everyone at the table has an idea of what you are.  

That does not mean (again for the umpteenth time) you need to go around beating your chest crying "I am Klingon" every time you turn around.  All it takes is, ((hang on, I'll do it really big so you won't miss it yet again))

30 SECONDS

of effort once in a while.

Is that clear enough?


----------



## Wepwawet (Oct 6, 2009)

I can understand your point, but all this rant because of an Half-Elf?! A half-human who is confused with a human? Come on, you could have come up with a better example. There are far worse things in role playing.

And I still say it's the other players' fault not knowing the guy is an half-elf.
I'm sure they were too busy practicing their fake accents to hear this guy saying he has slightly pointy ears and a goatee


----------



## Hussar (Oct 6, 2009)

Well, Wepwawet, this rant isn't exactly just because of the podcast.  It's something that's flown up my left nostril for a while.  For some reason it's always the elf (or half elf) players who do this.  Everyone else seems to be able to portray their character well enough to be recognized.  

But, unfortunately, everyone got too tied up in the specific example.  Meh.


----------



## wedgeski (Oct 6, 2009)

I'll RP my race *if it's important*. If it's not important to the character I'm trying to play, the role I'm trying to fill, or the slot I'm taking up in a Friday night hack'n'slash one-shot, it doesn't even flit through the tiniest recesses of my poor overloaded brain.

If I have no story to tell about my race, if it's simply who I am and who I've always been, it gets no screen time. Why bother? The character, the textures that make him or her unique in all of the characters I've played in my roleplaying life, is simply elsewhere.


----------



## Storminator (Oct 6, 2009)

Hussar said:


> My main argument is, if you're going to play something, PLAY IT.  Portray it in such a way that everyone at the table has an idea of what you are.
> 
> 30 SECONDS
> 
> ...




Are you sure it's Omin's fault? 

Didn't you, despite the many, many, many references to Omin as the CEO, the boss, the founder of Acquisitions Inc., the hiring manager, the writer of the articles of incorporation, etc, still think Binwin was in charge?

Perhaps the fault lies elsewhere...

PS


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 6, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I would point out that the version you are talking about was released about twenty years after the original version.  In the original, Decker's race was totally not an issue.  Like I said, it's a bit of a ret-con because he's now a huge name director and can get away with it.




Actually, it has been public knowledge that this was the ending that he wanted originally, but he was convinced/bullied by the studio to change the ending, because they thought it would sell better.


----------



## Wepwawet (Oct 6, 2009)

wedgeski said:


> I'll RP my race *if it's important*. If it's not important to the character I'm trying to play, the role I'm trying to fill, or the slot I'm taking up in a Friday night hack'n'slash one-shot, it doesn't even flit through the tiniest recesses of my poor overloaded brain.



Sure!
But most of the PC races have something different enough that a bit of RP pointing it out should come out naturally.
I have a water and fire Genasi Warden. He's an elemental warrior from a desert and that's what's important about him. But everyone at the table knows his race because he's always sweating or once he participated in an orgy underwater (important ritual, don't ask); and when we're being stealthy I stay far away because of my burning hair.

Ok, genasi may be an extreme example, but in our party there's a Shadar-Kai and... Well, she was in a ritual kissing and embracing a Deva priestess, and the DM planned it so that that embrace would look like an Yin-Yang (dark skin against light skin.. btw they where naked). That image was lost on me and probably on the others, because we weren't picturing the Shadar-Kai dark skin in her PC.
She's *just* a Rogue (rogues are so boooring)


----------



## Voadam (Oct 6, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Well, Wepwawet, this rant isn't exactly just because of the podcast.  It's something that's flown up my left nostril for a while.  For some reason it's always the elf (or half elf) players who do this.  Everyone else seems to be able to portray their character well enough to be recognized.
> 
> But, unfortunately, everyone got too tied up in the specific example.  Meh.






Hussar said:


> Pass/Agg snark aside, this was the World's Largest Dungeon.  It was a pretty high hack campaign.  Yet, funnily enough, as Merk points out, I remember clearly the goblin thief at the beginning, the kobold bard, the orc barbarian, even the dwarf cleric that only lasted a couple of sessions at the beginning.
> 
> Yet, the only reason people knew the elf ninja was an elf, is because I brought it up ((more along the lines of "Where is that "%)$%$(% elf boy? He's late again?" and the fact that after we booted his backside out of the group, I killed his character in a rather gruesome way. ))  The only reason he took elf was for the Dex bonus.




Was it this one guy or was he only one of a couple of times elf players have ticked you off? Any bad experiences with half-elves as well?


----------



## Voadam (Oct 6, 2009)

Wepwawet said:


> Ok, genasi may be an extreme example, but in our party there's a Shadar-Kai and... Well, she was in a ritual kissing and embracing a Deva priestess, and the DM planned it so that that embrace would look like an Yin-Yang (dark skin against light skin.. btw they where naked). That image was lost on me and probably on the others, because we weren't picturing the Shadar-Kai dark skin in her PC.
> She's *just* a Rogue (rogues are so boooring)




Aren't shadar kai pale skinned? I've never used them and its been a while since I looked them up in my fiend folio but my memory is pale skinned and not dark skinned. The 3e FF art gallery seems to back up that image.Shadar Kai


----------



## Wepwawet (Oct 6, 2009)

Voadam said:


> Aren't shadar kai pale skinned? I've never used them and its been a while since I looked them up in my fiend folio but my memory is pale skinned and not dark skinned. The 3e FF art gallery seems to back up that image.Shadar Kai



Damn! LOL
Anyway, my point is that only that time (apparently for the wrong motive) did I remember she was supposed to be a Shadar Kai... And it felt very strange


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Oct 7, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Umm, no?
> 
> Please show me where I said that.  In fact, there are numerous places where I say the exact opposite of that.
> 
> ...




First off, I'm the one who gives the random capitalizations and big bold texts ;p

Second...no.  It's not.

You're still putting way, WAY more emphasis on race then I think even people _of that race_ do.

If someone makes an elf who acts like a human, so what?  Maybe "elf" isn't a core part of who they are.  Hell, in some settings, it doesn't matter at all.  Al-Qadim puts emphasis that ALL races are city dwellers first and foremost, that the racial stereotypes don't take hold, and that the racial hatreds don't apply.  Eberron city elves act far more human then they do elvish, as do the half elves.

Again, you seem to have a huge bug up somewhere about this.  I get that the race matters a whole lot to you...but you're demanding that everyone else feel the same way.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 7, 2009)

Voadam said:


> Was it this one guy or was he only one of a couple of times elf players have ticked you off? Any bad experiences with half-elves as well?




Honestly, I haven't seen all that many half-elves that come to mind, so, that's actually a bit of a non-issue.  It's been my experience that the vast majority of players who play elves though, play humans that can see in the dark.  It's my pet peeve, and I believe I've admitted to such more than a few times here.  



			
				ProfC said:
			
		

> You're still putting way, WAY more emphasis on race then I think even people of that race do.




Look, if I decided to play a character that was female (I'm male), but did absolutely nothing to bring this up at the table, my first question would be, why?  Why did I gender bend then proceed to play a character that has no cues that it is female?

For the same reason, I would not play a black character TBH.  I'm not sure I could pull it off without it being stereotype and quite possibly offensive.  I'm not into gaming to annoy people (honestly ) and I don't think I'm capable of pulling it off.

That's my basic point here.  If you choose something for your character, no matter what it is, there should be a reason for it.  It doesn't matter what that choice is really - class, race, alignment - there's no difference in my mind.  They are all important.  Not equally important, I totally agree with that.  I'm not saying race should always get as much spotlight time as, say, class, which is likely going to get a lot more time in the game.

But, it should get a sliver of spotlight time.  At least enough time that no one else at the table turns to you and says with surprise, "You're a what?  Since when?"



			
				Storminator said:
			
		

> Are you sure it's Omin's fault?
> 
> Didn't you, despite the many, many, many references to Omin as the CEO, the boss, the founder of Acquisitions Inc., the hiring manager, the writer of the articles of incorporation, etc, still think Binwin was in charge?
> 
> Perhaps the fault lies elsewhere...




Umm, dude?  Did you miss the part in the podcast where the OTHER PLAYERS didn't know he was a half elf?  This has nothing to do with my lack of attention span.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Oct 7, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Look, if I decided to play a character that was female (I'm male), but did absolutely nothing to bring this up at the table, my first question would be, why?  Why did I gender bend then proceed to play a character that has no cues that it is female?




That says a lot more about you then other people, though.  Namely, you feel the need to assume that women, and elves, and dwarves, and male humans, all have something *inherent* about them that's different.



> For the same reason, I would not play a black character TBH.  I'm not sure I could pull it off without it being stereotype and quite possibly offensive.  I'm not into gaming to annoy people (honestly ) and I don't think I'm capable of pulling it off.




Again, the racism isn't from you having to be a stereotype, it's when you say "I can't play a black character *because they're different from white ones*."



> That's my basic point here.  If you choose something for your character, no matter what it is, there should be a reason for it.  It doesn't matter what that choice is really - class, race, alignment - there's no difference in my mind.  They are all important.  Not equally important, I totally agree with that.  I'm not saying race should always get as much spotlight time as, say, class, which is likely going to get a lot more time in the game.




But you're refusing to admit that the choice might be "because I felt like it."  As I've been saying, you're putting a whole lot of emphasis on this belief that a person's race says something inherent about them.  And both myself and a number of people here think you're incorrect about this.



> But, it should get a sliver of spotlight time.  At least enough time that no one else at the table turns to you and says with surprise, "You're a what?  Since when?"




At which point that party member can say verbatim what I've been saying: "Just because I'm <race> doesn't mean I have to <act specific way>."


----------



## Storminator (Oct 7, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Umm, dude?  Did you miss the part in the podcast where the OTHER PLAYERS didn't know he was a half elf?  This has nothing to do with my lack of attention span.




No, that's my whole point. _One_ of the players (the one with the same attention span as you...) says "Omin is a half-elf?" and the other says "he's always been a half-elf." So just because Omin's fellows are asleep at the table (kind of like you... get the point I was making? it's the inattentive one at fault? See? Get it? ...what about now? ) doesn't make Omin's player a bad RPer.

PS


----------



## Hussar (Oct 7, 2009)

Storminator said:


> No, that's my whole point. _One_ of the players (the one with the same attention span as you...) says "Omin is a half-elf?" and the other says "he's always been a half-elf." So just because Omin's fellows are asleep at the table (kind of like you... get the point I was making? it's the inattentive one at fault? See? Get it? ...what about now? ) doesn't make Omin's player a bad RPer.
> 
> PS




Meh, again, I was simply pointing to this as an example.  An example of something I've seen over and over again from people who play elves.  Apparently people seem to think that there is absolutely no differences between genders or ethnicity or race and we're all pretty much just exact carbon copies of each other.

I would point to a whole slew of media and writing that says that you're wrong.  That there really are actual differences between, say, men and women.  I know it might not be politically correct to say so, but, there really are differences there.  Honest.  

To be honest, I wasn't sure who said Omin has always been a half elf.  He's certainly not drawn as one in the comics.  But, again, for the umpteenth bloody time, IT WAS AN EXAMPLE.

Look, after this long, people have started just arguing me instead of the point I'm trying to make, so, like I said a few pages back, it's time for me to bow out.  

I leave with this final thought.  Yes, it's perfectly fine for "It sounds fun" to be a reason to choose something.  But, my question is, "Why?  Why does it sound fun?  What about that particular choice makes it appealing to you?  If your character behaves in all ways EXACTLY the same regardless of what race (or whatever the choice happens to be) you choose, then how does choosing something different add to your fun?  If your female character acts in all ways exactly the same as your male character, then how is writing female on your character sheet enhancing your fun?"

And, despite several pages of this thread, NOT ONE of you has answered that.  Not one person has bothered to explain why ignoring this enhances enjoyment at the table.  I've stated that ignoring choices actually hurts the fun at the table because it robs the rest of the players of the chance to role play as well.

So, if your choice makes zero difference to how you will play this character, why did you make the choice?


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 7, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Meh, again, I was simply pointing to this as an example.  An example of something I've seen over and over again from people who play elves.  Apparently people seem to think that there is absolutely no differences between genders or ethnicity or race and we're all pretty much just exact carbon copies of each other.
> 
> I would point to a whole slew of media and writing that says that you're wrong.  That there really are actual differences between, say, men and women.  I know it might not be politically correct to say so, but, there really are differences there.  Honest.
> 
> To be honest, I wasn't sure who said Omin has always been a half elf.  He's certainly not drawn as one in the comics.  But, again, for the umpteenth bloody time, IT WAS AN EXAMPLE.




Yes, it is an example - but one that really works against you. The main reason why? Because you called it out as an example of something 'wrong' with this approach to gaming, when the people playing in that game are _clearly having fun_. 



Hussar said:


> Look, after this long, people have started just arguing me instead of the point I'm trying to make, so, like I said a few pages back, it's time for me to bow out.
> 
> I leave with this final thought.  Yes, it's perfectly fine for "It sounds fun" to be a reason to choose something.  But, my question is, "Why?  Why does it sound fun?  What about that particular choice makes it appealing to you?  If your character behaves in all ways EXACTLY the same regardless of what race (or whatever the choice happens to be) you choose, then how does choosing something different add to your fun?  If your female character acts in all ways exactly the same as your male character, then how is writing female on your character sheet enhancing your fun?"
> 
> ...




There can be many reasons to make a choice without it having to be a _major_ one. I've always wanted to play a dwarf. I just read a book about a cool tiefling character. The campaign starts in a human city. Elves just seem to fit a woodland character. A player could easily have some small, minor reason when they chose their character, and then have it never come up in actual game play, or never matter to them enough to bring it up or make a big deal of it. 

Or sometimes choices are made for reasons of optimization - one can still roleplay that character despite the motive. Or they can make the choice, and focus on _other_ aspects of the character, which is also acceptable. Or, honestly, they can not worry about roleplaying at all - that doesn't inherently make them a _worse gamer_, just means they might not fit in with certain groups of players.

Here is the thing, though - there is no damage done. You claim it "robs the rest of the players of the chance to role play as well" - which is absurd. There is no set amount of topics on which one can roleplay. The lack of mention of a character's race doesn't mean the party sits in absolute silence for the five minutes they would have spent RPing their feelings about that character's race - instead, they spend those five minutes _doing other roleplaying_. Or cracking jokes, or rolling dice and slaying enemies, or any of the other myriad parts of D&D that people enjoy. 

Not being able to comment on someone's race does not remotely deprive people of their fun - while forcing someone to roleplay exactly according to your own personal rules? Yeah, that can drain the fun out the game _instantly_. 

You've claimed that no one has been willing to answer your question - but you, equally, have repeatedly refused to answer mine: 

Do you really feel that players focusing on their class as a defining element rather than their race makes them 'bad roleplayers'?

Do you honestly believe that people that don't put an emphasis on roleplaying, or simply don't roleplay _enough_ aspects of their character, are somehow worse gamers?

If you don't believe those statements... then I have no idea what this discussion is about. Everyone plays the game for different reasons and in different ways. There shouldn't be a problem with that. If you do believe those statements... then all I can say is that your outlook is one I vehemently disagree with, and the sort of attitude that represents the worst of what this hobby has to offer. 

I honestly don't know if that is what you believe - your initial post seemed to represent more a lack of _understanding_ why other people might play differently than you, but as people have continued to answer that question (and you have continually refused to accept their explanations), you seem to much more be making a value judgement here. That there is something _wrong_ with how they play. That is personally offends you when someone doesn't play up their race. 

I'm not sure what else to tell you. Why would someone play as a non-human race and then not mention the race? I can think of hundreds of reasons, but can't offer you one universal one - it will vary from player to player in every instance. But in the end, each player will have had a reason for making that decision - so the question is, why do _they_ need to justify their reason to _you_, if they are having a good time playing the game in their own fashion?


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Oct 7, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Meh, again, I was simply pointing to this as an example.  An example of something I've seen over and over again from people who play elves.  Apparently people seem to think that there is absolutely no differences between genders or ethnicity or race and we're all pretty much just exact carbon copies of each other.
> 
> I would point to a whole slew of media and writing that says that you're wrong.  That there really are actual differences between, say, men and women.  I know it might not be politically correct to say so, but, there really are differences there.  Honest.




And as someone who has and continues to work with gender and ethnic studies alongside social psychology, _no, the differences are far smaller then you or the media thinks they are_.

Hell, look at the internet.  At how easy it is to masquerade as a different ethnicity or gender just by stating you are such gender/ethnicity.  Lots of people out there get honestly surprised by some people when they state they're a girl, not because "hurr durr no girls on the internet," but because the person in question never mentioned being one.

Again, you are driving this quite frankly incorrect opinion as a fact, that all genders and ethnicities have inherently different ways of thinking.


----------



## Akaiku (Oct 7, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> Again, you are driving this quite frankly incorrect opinion as a fact, that all genders and ethnicities have inherently different ways of thinking.




However, they almost always look different. More people should use figures or pictures for their dnding so people can keep track of such things.


----------



## chitzk0i (Oct 7, 2009)

So how exactly do you roleplay a half-elf?  If your character's a dwarf, you can say, "By Thorin's beard!" or be an angry drunk.  If your character is a dragonborn, you could put on an honorable warrior hat.  If your character is a halfling, you talk about, what, your riverboating days?  Your tiefling could brood and get kicked out of places?  Half-elves can, like, uh... talk about their mixed heritage?  Half-elves don't have a hat you can put on so everyone says "Oh, half-elf!"  What could the guy in the podcast have done to make you realize that?


----------



## Hussar (Oct 8, 2009)

Well, people asked nicely, so I'll keep playing.  



			
				Mr. Myth said:
			
		

> You've claimed that no one has been willing to answer your question - but you, equally, have repeatedly refused to answer mine:
> 
> Do you really feel that players focusing on their class as a defining element rather than their race makes them 'bad roleplayers'?




Nope.  I believe I stated this repeatedly.  I KNOW I stated repeatedly that you do not have to make race a defining element.



> Do you honestly believe that people that don't put an emphasis on roleplaying, or simply don't roleplay enough aspects of their character, are somehow worse gamers?




Nope.  However, I do think they are worse role players.  If person A portrays all aspects of his character and person B portrays only a subset of the aspects, Person A is a better role player.  How can he not be?

Being a better role player has nothing to do with fun or being a "good gamer".  I can easily say that Actor A is better than Actor B but, that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy Actor B's movies.  There are great actors and there are good actors and there are bad actors.  I've enjoyed movies with all three types.  

In the same way, I can enjoy a hack and slash, kick in the door game as much as the next guy.  However, I'm not about to pass that off as a great role playing session.



			
				ProfC said:
			
		

> Again, you are driving this quite frankly incorrect opinion as a fact, that all genders and ethnicities have inherently different ways of thinking.




So, according to you, I could change Luke Skywalker to Lucy Skywalker, change none of the dialogue in the rest of the movie, change none of the scenes, and it should make absolutely no difference in the movie?  

Or, perhaps in the new Sherlock Holmes movie, Watson could be played by Nicole Kidman and it would be exactly the same story?

Or, we could have Morgan Freeman's character in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves be played by a white actor and it would make no difference to that story?  

After all, you're claiming that there are absolutely no differences in gender or race, therefore we should be able to swap out any actor in any role and tell exactly the same story and no one would notice.



			
				chitzk0i said:
			
		

> So how exactly do you roleplay a half-elf? If your character's a dwarf, you can say, "By Thorin's beard!" or be an angry drunk. If your character is a dragonborn, you could put on an honorable warrior hat. If your character is a halfling, you talk about, what, your riverboating days? Your tiefling could brood and get kicked out of places? Half-elves can, like, uh... talk about their mixed heritage? Half-elves don't have a hat you can put on so everyone says "Oh, half-elf!" What could the guy in the podcast have done to make you realize that?




Well, let's use the podcast as a specific example.  

Wil Wheaton added the eladrin character.  So, right there, there's your in.  "Oh, you're an eladrin.  My mother told me many stories of the Eladrin homeland.  I'd love to see it sometime."

They went to a bar - "Do you have any ((Insert elven sounding wine here))?"

Most people of mixed heritages are curious about their heritages to some degree.  Show a bit of curiousity once in a while and that cements in everyone's head that you are half-elven.

You could certainly reverse it as well.  If your half-elf was raised mostly elven, have him ask about human stuff.


----------



## Barastrondo (Oct 8, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I leave with this final thought.  Yes, it's perfectly fine for "It sounds fun" to be a reason to choose something.  But, my question is, "Why?  Why does it sound fun?  What about that particular choice makes it appealing to you?  If your character behaves in all ways EXACTLY the same regardless of what race (or whatever the choice happens to be) you choose, then how does choosing something different add to your fun?  If your female character acts in all ways exactly the same as your male character, then how is writing female on your character sheet enhancing your fun?"




Is not the aesthetic enough? Is not "I think this character would look great if he was portrayed by Idris Elba" reason enough to play a black character? Is not "I think elves look neat, and I would like my character to look like that" reason enough to play an elf? Choosing race or gender or ethnicity may be as simple as picking an eye color or a heraldic device. 

It seems rather silly to demand justification for players picking a race on aesthetic, rules or even thoroughly whimsical grounds. Why it entertains them isn't really the point: when you start asking why they don't just play a human, you're not really asking about how they're deriving their entertainment, you're asking about why they're not entertaining you to your own personal standard by roleplaying these choices in such a way that you expect. And though it may depend on the group, that probably isn't their job.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 8, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Nope.  However, I do think they are worse role players.  If person A portrays all aspects of his character and person B portrays only a subset of the aspects, Person A is a better role player.  How can he not be?




Look, this isn't a game where you have to hit a set quota of topics about your character. One isn't graded on roleplaying by the quantity of topics they roleplayed - a character who is a religious fanatic to the exclusion of all else, can be just as solidly roleplayed as a dwarven warrior who values his culture, his country, and his faith, can be just as solidly roleplayed as the planar-traveling rogue who seems to focus on a new character element every session. 

The problem is that you are telling people what aspects of their character are important. That isn't your decision - that is _theirs_. The fact that Person B didn't make a big deal of his race doesn't represent a failure of roleplaying on his behalf - it represents him prioritizing different character elements than you do.

That returns us to the start of this thread, where you seemed to be looking for an explanation of this behavior. You've been given one - many players might not feel that race is a defining element of a specific character. Having been given that explanation, though, you've turned from wondering what their motivations are, to actively condemning them. 



Hussar said:


> So, according to you, I could change Luke Skywalker to Lucy Skywalker, change none of the dialogue in the rest of the movie, change none of the scenes, and it should make absolutely no difference in the movie?
> 
> Or, perhaps in the new Sherlock Holmes movie, Watson could be played by Nicole Kidman and it would be exactly the same story?
> 
> Or, we could have Morgan Freeman's character in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves be played by a white actor and it would make no difference to that story?




There are many characters for whom specifics are important. There are also many for whom it isn't - are you telling me that of every movie in existence, in not a _single one_ can you find a character who you could change the race of while having the rest of the story remain fully intact?

You are completely perverting the opposing argument in order to win this debate. No one is claiming that there are "absolutely no differences in gender or race". People are simply stating that there _can exist roles_ in which those specific elements are not relevant. Trying to deny that by picking out individual examples that don't work - while ignoring the _limitless_ number of ones that _do_... that's not reasonable by any stretch of the imagination. 



Hussar said:


> Wil Wheaton added the eladrin character.  So, right there, there's your in.  "Oh, you're an eladrin.  My mother told me many stories of the Eladrin homeland.  I'd love to see it sometime."
> 
> They went to a bar - "Do you have any ((Insert elven sounding wine here))?"
> 
> _*Most*_ people of mixed heritages are curious about their heritages to some degree.  Show a bit of curiousity once in a while and that cements in everyone's head that you are half-elven.




There is one key word in there that is a pretty big deal. You seem to feel that every character should be defined precisely as you feel is appropriate. You don't have that right. _What if Tycho's character doesn't care about Eladrin homelands, doesn't care about elven wines, isn't curious about elven customs or human customs???

_What if he was raced in a human city, and his elven heritage just doesn't matter to him? I am almost incapable of believing that you genuinely feel there are stereotypes that _must_ be adhered to in order to qualify as a 'good roleplayer'. 

Do you genuinely feel there could not exist a half-elf who was raised in human society, has made peace with their mixed heritage, and doesn't in any way let it influence their outlook of the world? 

Because I know people like that _in real life_, and let me tell you - once I start applying the arguments you are using to real-world examples, it becomes frightening how offensive they are. There may well be traits that are common to one demographic or another, but they are never universal. Stereotypes are not some law that needs to be enforced, and insisting upon it in a game - not just preferring it, but literally claiming it is a requirement for good roleplaying - is absurd to the extreme.


----------



## Sacrificial Lamb (Oct 8, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Meh, again, I was simply pointing to this as an example.  An example of something I've seen over and over again from people who play elves.  Apparently people seem to think that there is absolutely no differences between genders or ethnicity or race and we're all pretty much just exact carbon copies of each other.
> 
> I would point to a whole slew of media and writing that says that you're wrong.  That there really are actual differences between, say, men and women.  I know it might not be politically correct to say so, but, there really are differences there.  Honest.
> 
> ...




Dude, you're frothing at the mouth here. It's not that big of a deal. Let's say I have a half-elven fighter named Bob, raised by humans. Neither he nor his adoptive parents care about his ancestry. He feels no conflict about his mixed heritage. _And that's fine._ In real life, I have a mixed ancestry, and I don't care about these things either. 

In this case, "Bob", the half-elf was charming and pleasant, so he never had to suffer much in the way of racial intolerance.

So why did I choose to create a half-elf? _BECAUSE I FELT LIKE IT._ The end.

These details aren't important to everybody, and it doesn't mean we're roleplaying our characters "the wrong way". It just means we're not roleplaying our characters _Hussar's way._ Of all the things for a gamer to get worked up about, this one really takes the cake.

Oh, and by the way, don't compare roleplaying games to novels. That's a poor analogy, and it simply doesn't fly here. _Period._

P.S. In case you're wondering, I use a funny voice when I roleplay my raven familiar (if it matters), but I only do so when the mood takes me, and not when it suits someone else. So please don't tell me how to play my damn elf or half-elf, because that's downright obnoxious.


----------



## Merkuri (Oct 9, 2009)

Hussar said:


> So, according to you, I could change Luke Skywalker to Lucy Skywalker, change none of the dialogue in the rest of the movie, change none of the scenes, and it should make absolutely no difference in the movie?




Or take the movie Aliens and cast a female actor for the originally male character Ripley and not change any action or dialog?  Oh, wait, that one worked just fine.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Oct 9, 2009)

Hussar said:


> So, according to you, I could change Luke Skywalker to Lucy Skywalker, change none of the dialogue in the rest of the movie, change none of the scenes, and it should make absolutely no difference in the movie?




Interestingly enough the Luke Skywalker character was originally conceived as female.


----------



## UndeadScottsman (Oct 9, 2009)

Blair Goatsblood said:


> Interestingly enough the Luke Skywalker character was originally conceived as female.




And honestly, the only issue I have with making the character female is explaining why Han never hit on her.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Oct 9, 2009)

UndeadScottsman said:


> And honestly, the only issue I have with making the character female is explaining why Han never hit on her.



I think Han was originally a different species.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 9, 2009)

UndeadScottsman said:


> And honestly, the only issue I have with making the character female is explaining why Han never hit on her.




Well, there'd still be Leia around, and Han didn't even hit on Leia in Episode IV until the closing moments of the movie. I don't think he'd be particularly into some brat farmer kid who kept getting him into trouble.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 9, 2009)

Barastrondo said:


> Is not the aesthetic enough? Is not "I think this character would look great if he was portrayed by Idris Elba" reason enough to play a black character? Is not "I think elves look neat, and I would like my character to look like that" reason enough to play an elf? Choosing race or gender or ethnicity may be as simple as picking an eye color or a heraldic device.
> 
> It seems rather silly to demand justification for players picking a race on aesthetic, rules or even thoroughly whimsical grounds. Why it entertains them isn't really the point: when you start asking why they don't just play a human, you're not really asking about how they're deriving their entertainment, you're asking about why they're not entertaining you to your own personal standard by roleplaying these choices in such a way that you expect. And though it may depend on the group, that probably isn't their job.




But, if you never bring that aesthetic to the table, who cares?  "My character would look great portrayed by Idris Elba" is fantastic.  Great.  Wonderful.

Now, communicate that fact to the rest of the players at the table.

Because if, in your mind, your character looks like Idris Elba, but you never once refer to yourself that way, in no way mention any physical aspect of your character, then how is anyone at the table EVER going to recognize that aesthetic choice?

That's the point I keep coming back to.  It's all well and good to have these ideas in your head, but, until they actually get brought up in play, how do they exist anywhere else?  You can picture your character however you want.  That's a good thing.  You should have a mental picture of your character.

But, until you show everyone else that picture, who cares?  If it only exists in your mind, then it certainly isn't being role played.



			
				Merkuri said:
			
		

> Or take the movie Aliens and cast a female actor for the originally male character Ripley and not change any action or dialog? Oh, wait, that one worked just fine.




So, you're saying that if Ripley was replaced by a male actor, then all the dynamics of Alien, and especially Alien 2, would be exactly the same?

Note, there's nothing saying you can't replace the characters.  What I'm saying is if you replace the characters, then they are going to be received differently.

Sacrificial Lamb - I understand what you're saying.  But the response is pretty much the same as what I said to Barastrondo.  You chose to play a half-elf, just because.  No deep thought, no real reason in particular.  How is anyone playing with you going to know that you are a half elf?  

Are you saying that every single NPC in the world should react to you in exactly the same way regardless of your race?  Are you claiming that all the PC's should treat you exactly the same regardless of your race?  But, if you never bring it up, and everyone else doesn't think to ask, then that's exactly what's going to happen.  

For the umpteenth time, please don't put words in my mouth.  I'm asking for thirty seconds of effort once in a while to establish an obvious, visible fact about your character.  The character is not human.  Unless you take some pains to hide that fact (which in turn draws attention at the table to the fact that your character isn't human and serves the same purpose), people are going to recognize your character as being different.

I'm not saying that it MUST BE A MAJOR DEAL.  What I'm saying is that players should make a minimal amount of effort to establish fairly obvious physical facts about their characters.  

Wow, you guys make it sound like I'm demanding so much.  I'm asking for 30 seconds of work.  Is it really so much to ask?


----------



## Barastrondo (Oct 9, 2009)

Hussar said:


> But, if you never bring that aesthetic to the table, who cares?  "My character would look great portrayed by Idris Elba" is fantastic.  Great.  Wonderful.
> 
> Now, communicate that fact to the rest of the players at the table.




Sure. Particularly if they ask. However, this does cut both ways. If you've been playing for three months and suddenly the rest of the group is saying "Wait, you're black? I totally didn't know who that actor was you mentioned; I was buying equipment and didn't think about it", it's not just on the player who's not making an issue of character description. It's also on every other player who didn't ask for a clear picture of what their fellow characters looked like. In the case of the podcast, Omin Dran's race didn't matter to anybody for the first adventure or so; it didn't matter enough to Tycho to be a part of his character (likely again due to the pre-gen), and it didn't matter enough to the other guys.



> Because if, in your mind, your character looks like Idris Elba, but you never once refer to yourself that way, in no way mention any physical aspect of your character, then how is anyone at the table EVER going to recognize that aesthetic choice?




If they care enough, one would assume they ask. We're describing a really odd situation here, though, where nobody knows what race or ethnicity or even gender your character is: one that depends on one player not reminding everyone else what his or her character looks like, and also on other players not caring enough to keep the picture in their head or to ask. 



> I'm not saying that it MUST BE A MAJOR DEAL.  What I'm saying is that players should make a minimal amount of effort to establish fairly obvious physical facts about their characters.
> 
> Wow, you guys make it sound like I'm demanding so much.  I'm asking for 30 seconds of work.  Is it really so much to ask?




Even if it takes a mere 30 seconds to describe your character, it takes a mere 5 for anyone else at the table to say "Hey, what did you look like again?" If players don't make a minimal amount of effort to care about fairly obvious physical facts about the other characters in the group, it doesn't matter whether someone takes that 30 seconds or not. In instances where, for instance, nobody remembers that Dave is playing an elf, I don't think it's fair to place that solely at Dave's feet.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Oct 10, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I'm asking for thirty seconds of effort once in a while to establish an obvious, visible fact about your character.




I don't think it's standard in D&D to regularly describe what your character looks like. The only time I ever notice it with any frequency is when there's a new player in the group and the DM prods the regulars to do so.


----------



## lutecius (Oct 10, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Meh, again, I was simply pointing to this as an example.  […] But, again, for the umpteenth bloody time, IT WAS AN EXAMPLE.



 A bad example, apparently 
No one seems to agree that a half-elf couldn't act like a human.



> Apparently people seem to think that there is absolutely no differences between genders or ethnicity or race and we're all pretty much just exact carbon copies of each other.
> 
> I would point to a whole slew of media and writing that says that you're wrong.  That there really are actual differences between, say, men and women.  I know it might not be politically correct to say so, but, there really are differences there.



Statistical differences don't mean _every_ black or female has to act according to type or that these differences would automatically come up in a game.

Of course we're not all carbon copies of each other but in many regards, variations between individuals are greater than variations between sexes or races. I find the former more interesting to explore.

Whether fantasy races should come hardwired with behavioural or even cultural baggage is a matter of preference, not good or bad roleplaying.



> I've stated that ignoring choices actually hurts the fun at the table because it robs the rest of the players of the chance to role play as well.



I don't think it's true, though. When the difference is chiefly biological (like race or gender), the way it's perceived by others is at least as relevant as your actual behaviour. 

I think in most games, a brief description is given when new characters are introduced. At the very least, race and gender are mentioned. If some detail matters to other characters or in the game world in general, I'd say it's up to the DM and other players' to pay attention and roleplay accordingly.

Drow NPCs shouldn't wait for a PC to hug a tree or do something elvish to shout "surface scum!!!". If a player wants his paladin to act chivalrous, he shouldn't need the party's wizard to mention her bbs.



> So, if your choice makes zero difference to how you will play this character, why did you make the choice?



Because that's how you like to envision this character. Gender or race could be an important part of his/her personality or about as relevant as hair colour. Every small detail can enhance the experience, not all need to be roleplayed.

Whether in books or rpgs, many details can contribute to fleshing out the characters without being mentioned again after their first appearance. It's not bad writing or bad roleplaying. It's the reader's/players' fault if they miss or forget something.

Race and gender expectations may also cast a different light on a character's actions without defining them. Playing against type actually says something about a character: "with an axe? how un-elvish of him", "wow, she's hitting on the _tavern wench_".

Then in D&D you also pick a race for the abilities. It's not necessarily power gaming. Sometimes you want to play a character who can see in the dark for the same reason you pick a class… because you like the flavour these abilities add to your character. That doesn't mean you also want to play into the stereotypes associated with said race or class. Of course some come as part of a package (paladins follow a code, drows are distrusted by all, dragonborns look stupid…)


----------



## Hussar (Oct 10, 2009)

lutecius said:
			
		

> Drow NPCs shouldn't wait for a PC to hug a tree or do something elvish to shout "surface scum!!!". If a player wants his paladin to act chivalrous, he shouldn't need the party's wizard to mention her bbs.




But, if the party's wizard doesn't ever mention that the character is female, how can my chivalrous paladin act chivalrous.  If the player was male and never mentioned that the character is female and has a wonky fantasy name that is pretty much gender neutral, why would I even think to ask?  There's no reason for me to ask.  

Like Bastarondo says, many of the choices we make about a character are aesthetic.  There's nothing wrong with that.  But, if you fail to communicate that aesthetic, then it only exists in your head.  Yeah, it mightn't hurt for other players to ask once in a while, but, it's YOUR character.  Role playing your character should include a bit of conveying basic facts to the audience shouldn't it?

Bringing something up once during chargen and then never referencing it again is not exactly stellar role play.

Let's take an innocuous example for a second.  My character has a beard.  In my mind, when I picture my character he has a beard.  It's not important, it certainly has no bearing on any mechanics, it's a purely aesthetic choice.  However, if  I don't convey the fact that I have a beard, then no one at the table is likely to assume that I have one, and, honestly, they're pretty unlikely to ask either.

So, my image of my character differs from that of the other players.  So, a couple of times, perhaps when I'm being pensive, I mention that my character is stroking his beard while deep in thought.  Maybe I make some stroking hand gestures as well.  A smidgeon of acting at the table.

Now, everyone at the table has a clearer picture of my character.  Or at least a mental picture that is more in line with what I am envisioning.

Isn't that a good thing?

So, going back to B's example of a black character.  Mention it.  Bring it up as an aside from time to time.  Not quite sure how in this case to be honest.  Pictures work.  Presuming that the campaign is bog standard Faux-Euro fantasy, I would imagine that your black character is likely from somewhere else.  Bring that up.  He's from a desert country, for example.  

Now, if the other players don't pick up on things, that's not your fault.  All I'm asking for here is the effort.  If you bring it up and everyone blows it off, maybe try a second time and if that still doesn't get it across, well, ok, you made the effort, good enough.

But, you certainly lose nothing by making the effort.


----------



## Theroc (Oct 11, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Let's take an innocuous example for a second.  My character has a beard.  In my mind, when I picture my character he has a beard.  It's not important, it certainly has no bearing on any mechanics, it's a purely aesthetic choice.  However, if  I don't convey the fact that I have a beard, then no one at the table is likely to assume that I have one, and, honestly, they're pretty unlikely to ask either.




I would if you said you were a Dwarf.  Heck, even Dwarven WOMEN are supposed to have beards, at least according to one Icewind Dale PC game.  So, if you say Dwarf, I think beard.  So, your example character is probably something besides a Dwarf, I'd say.



Hussar said:


> But, you certainly lose nothing by making the effort.



 Except the time and effort, and quite possibly the frustrations of your effort being wasted on those who ignore it.

I've lurked in the discussion for awhile now, and I sorta agree with Hussar that it's weird that no one noticed, but I also know that I personally dislike having my characters have a great deal of baggage pregenerated.  Usually it makes my characters two dimensional because I feel restricted and locked in a straightjacket by the stereotypes or trying to figure out how my character 'should logically act given the various events in their past' adding, 'and their racial problems' as well, could become tedious.

Though, generally I *DO* make the mention in the biography.

But personally, I think this thread has basically run it's course.  

Happy gaming all.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 11, 2009)

Hussar said:


> But, you certainly lose nothing by making the effort.




You keep saying this, and keep being wrong. Time spent 'doing what Hussar enjoys' comes at the expense of time spent 'doing what _that player_ enjoys'. Because keep in mind - 30 seconds might be enough to give one small tidbit of info, but it could grow into much larger amounts of time when other people ask for clarification, and gets multiplied by all the tiny elements you feel the player should make known - and gets further multiplied by each player at the table providing their own similar descriptions. 

They could instead spend that time roleplaying about the plot, or engaging in discussions that focus on the more important elements of their characters, or any number of other activities. They key is, they should spend that time - however brief - doing what _they enjoy_, not what _you enjoy_. 

I mean, I think you have good intentions at heart, here - you feel that if more people played this way, it would improve the quality of their game. What I can't understand is how you refuse to accept that other people might disagree, and might have good reasons to want to spend their time focusing on other elements of the game, or other aspects of their character. 

Here's an example. My friend is running a game in which I'm playing a character who was an Eladrin, who left the Feywild to help share his culture with the developing human civilization. He ran an academy in the human capital, offering courses in the arts, studies of history and arcana, and similar. 

But the game, from Day 1, pretty much cast the party directly into the wilderness and had them vanquishing evil in the wild. Because of that, there hasn't been as many opportunities to focus on certain aspects of his character. I'm sure the rest of the group has an impression of him as a cultured individual, and he has certain habits that reinforce that point (always trying to talk enemies into surrender, waxing eloquent about his many former experiences across the planes, etc). 

But there are also many, _many_ background elements that have _never_ come up. Things I wrote up in my character background, thought were cool touches for him, but have never had reason to mention in play. By your argument, this is an issue - why should I come up with such things if they never see the light of the day?

The thing is, _I'm _certainly still aware of them - they still inform how my character behaves and acts. And while I'm sure I could have found reason to bring them up, there are many times when it would have actively _hurt the game _for me to do so - in the middle of a session, I could certainly take advantage of a momentary pause while the party rested to start a conversation with the bard about music and the arts. And the two of us might banter back and forth for some time, roleplaying to our hearts content - while the rest of the group had little to contribute and the game session slowed to a crawl. Because we could also be spending that time doing something we all could enjoy or participate in, or advancing the plot, or whatever.

I've seen plenty of RPGA games where a player comes in and has come up with all sorts of background for his character... and runs rampant over the rest of the group as he tries to bring up all these intricate details, and ends up monopolizing much of the roleplaying and character interaction. _I've been that player_, and realized that there are times when you can be perfectly content knowing your character background and being satisfied with it on your own.

Look, I don't have an issue with you preferring this style of play and feeling more people should try it. My problem is that you genuinely seem to feel it is the _only_ acceptable way to play, and that not doing so automatically means a group is missing out on roleplaying. Can you truly not accept that some people might feel that time is better spent focusing on more important aspects of their character, or roleplaying about the world around them or the plot, rather than about character details that are not important to them?


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 11, 2009)

Okay, how -exactly- do you 'roleplay' half-elfiness?

I mean, other than 'My mom had a thing for elves/humans.'  If you're raised by elves, you play an elf, if you're raised by humans, you play a human, if you're ostracized, you play a pariah, if you're embraced, you play a well-adjusted individual.

There's no real stereotype you can 'latch on to.'  Not to mention 'half-elf' isn't exactly as ingrained in our culture as the fantasy tropes of elf/dwarf/hobbit, so you can't exactly say 'Half-elf' and have an icon of it appear.

So the fact that the guy playing D&D for the first time didn't latch on to a stereotype that doesn't exist in the game or outside of it in the general culture is somehow a marr against roleplaying chops?

Seriously.  Think this stuff through, please, as a general rule for life.  Last thing we need in this world is more 'you suck' coming from people who assume that everyone should have exactly the same feelings and desires as they do.


----------



## Barastrondo (Oct 11, 2009)

Hussar said:


> But, if the party's wizard doesn't ever mention that the character is female, how can my chivalrous paladin act chivalrous.  If the player was male and never mentioned that the character is female and has a wonky fantasy name that is pretty much gender neutral, why would I even think to ask?  There's no reason for me to ask.




Well, that also says something about the observer. If you tend to assume, unless instructed otherwise, that a character resembles its player in any way save the ways said player specifically says it doesn't, that's your own assumptions at play. And depending on the observer, it can be hard to overcome that initial assumption; lots of people came away from _A Wizard of Earthsea_ thinking of Ged as white. 



> Like Bastarondo says, many of the choices we make about a character are aesthetic.  There's nothing wrong with that.  But, if you fail to communicate that aesthetic, then it only exists in your head.  Yeah, it mightn't hurt for other players to ask once in a while, but, it's YOUR character.  Role playing your character should include a bit of conveying basic facts to the audience shouldn't it?




In theory, yes. However, I don't think people are wrong for doing it otherwise, even if it's not my style, because they might not be into roleplaying in a way that involves the concept of "I have an audience." There are gamers out there who don't particularly care if anybody else at the table thinks it's cool that they're playing an elf: they think it's cool to play an elf, and therefore they do so.

Where my hackles raise is when the word "should" comes into play. Do I think people should give me some sort of description of their character if I ask? Yes. Do I think they should make repeated efforts to get descriptive details across even if nobody else at the table is expressing interest and they're not particularly interested in the process of getting descriptive? Nope. If there is no demand, either on your fellow players' part or your own, I don't think people should be held to that.



> Now, everyone at the table has a clearer picture of my character.  Or at least a mental picture that is more in line with what I am envisioning.
> 
> Isn't that a good thing?




Sure, particularly for specific groups. If there's no demand from your fellow players for description, you can still persevere at it and maybe bring them around to wanting more description if they have a positive experience.

But here's the thing: if you want more details about your fellow characters' appearances, the number-one best way to encourage them to provide them is to ask. Not to tell them how much more fun everyone else would be having if they kept on nudging elements of their character description into conversation: just ask. It is the absolute surest way to make sure that they know there is an audience for that sort of thing. Because if nobody else at their table is asking, there might not be an audience for that sort of thing. And if there isn't — and if a player isn't at the game with the intent of portraying a character for an audience — there's no moral impetus for trying to change things. 

Again, I'm basically playing devil's advocate here. I like descriptions. I try to get them out of all my players. But I always ask for descriptions if I don't have the picture straight in my head. If it turns out that somebody's been a half-elf for two sessions and I never noticed, it's at least 50% on me for not inquiring in the first place, or bothering to remember if it did come up.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 12, 2009)

Mr. Myth - honestly, I think we agree more than we disagree.  Sure, if the player is running rampant over the rest of the party, that's a bad thing.  Of course and nothing I've said would contradict this.  Again, I'm looking for 30 seconds of effort.  If you start conversations with the bard and monopolize forty or fifty minutes of game time, that's a problem.  But, again, that's totally not what I'm talking about.  That's a far extreme.

Keep it to what I'm actually asking about - 30 seconds of effort.  Mention small tidbits, from time to time, that give the rest of the group something to hang a mental picture off of.

Now, Barastrondo, you mention the player that simply doesn't care.  He doesn't care if anyone else at the table has a mental picture of his character.  Would you call him a good role player?  If he makes no effort to portray his character in any way other than simply the mechanics ((I am Fytor, I use a sword +2)), would you characterize him as a good role player?

I certainly wouldn't.


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 12, 2009)

Hussar said:


> If he makes no effort to portray his character in any way other than simply the mechanics ((I am Fytor, I use a sword +2)), would you characterize him as a good role player?
> 
> I certainly wouldn't.




But is 'good roleplayer' essential for the enjoyment of D&D?  Some people are in it for the tactical exercise.  Other people are in it for catharsis of one sort or another.

I've had -more- games ruined by obnoxious variants of that guy who gets bent out of shape because another player doesn't have fun in an exacting specific way than I've -ever- had games ruined by someone who decided they didn't want to go into a deep background for their character.

Heck, some players (Including myself on occasion) shun detailed backgrounds because they want the game and their character's reactions to be based on what happens during the -game- shared with other people rather than what happened in your head.  Playing a Tabula Rasa in that regard is -not- bad roleplaying at all.  It's simply putting your motivation in a more immediate sense, and making the gameplay -itself- the guiding background for your characters.

Some players find they can play more dynamic characters that way, rather than the bad-animesque "I had a traumatic experience in childhood and now I can only ever act in a singular predetermined fashion" that you often see from 'background'-saavy players.


----------



## Blair Goatsblood (Oct 12, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> Heck, some players (Including myself on occasion) shun detailed backgrounds because they want the game and their character's reactions to be based on what happens during the -game- shared with other people rather than what happened in your head.  ......and making the gameplay -itself- the guiding background for your characters.




Bingo, the Game comes before the Story, which itself is a pleasant bonus on top of the primary goal of _having fun._


----------



## Theroc (Oct 12, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> Some players find they can play more dynamic characters that way, rather than the bad-animesque "I had a traumatic experience in childhood and now I can only ever act in a singular predetermined fashion" that you often see from 'background'-saavy players.





Draco summed up my strait-jacket feeling rather well.  I've had this happen on other formats besides D&D.  (Haven't had it too much in D&D, as I don't feel people will jump on me as much about my character's brain as in some other places)  Basically, I don't want the history to predetermine my choices in game.  If I ended up making such a history, I definitely want to work with my DM and group to BREAK that restraint with me so my character can be more dynamic and flow with the game.

I often find I can roleplayer more effectively if there's less 'fluff' in the background of my character.  Though, I suppose I could always go and describe my characters appearance a few times as well, it really doesn't seem crucial to the game.  For 'roleplaying' however, I suppose it is important, thought I don't think there is one school of thought on the definition of good roleplaying.

I was once on a site that I nearly got banned from because I did not agree that the most important component was proper spelling and grammar.  I shortly thereafter left, because I didn't feel welcome after that.


----------



## Barastrondo (Oct 12, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Now, Barastrondo, you mention the player that simply doesn't care.  He doesn't care if anyone else at the table has a mental picture of his character.  Would you call him a good role player?  If he makes no effort to portray his character in any way other than simply the mechanics ((I am Fytor, I use a sword +2)), would you characterize him as a good role player?
> 
> I certainly wouldn't.




No, but I really don't think the "for heaven's sake, just tell us what your character is like, and if it looks like we've forgotten, remind us" approach, wherein you place all the responsibility on the player to be proactive about communication, is going to make him a better one. Stating a rule wherein "if you do not do this, you are a bad roleplayer" is no kind of encouragement. There is no universal responsibility for him to entertain you without prompting. There is no universal requirement for someone to be a "good roleplayer" to be allowed to play D&D. They don't owe you that if you're not even willing to ask for it.

If you want someone to become a good roleplayer, take an interest. Ask what his character's like. Lead by example. See if you can't get him interested in sharing with the rest of the players, basically by doing what you think he should be doing yourself and looking like you're having fun doing it. But lectures are less encouraging than leading by example, and saying "you're not a good roleplayer" is about seventy-three times less productive than just asking what his character looks like in the first place. 

It just doesn't seem worth a rant to me, or a rule or anything. If people care about projecting their image into their fellow players' heads, they'll do it. If people care what a character looks like, they'll ask. If neither party cares, what exactly is going wrong?


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 12, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Mr. Myth - honestly, I think we agree more than we disagree.




And I actually... don't. I'm pretty sure I disagree thoroughly with the heart of your premise and everything it represents. 



Hussar said:


> Keep it to what I'm actually asking about - 30 seconds of effort. Mention small tidbits, from time to time, that give the rest of the group something to hang a mental picture off of.




I'm starting to get somewhat frustrated with you sidestepping all the points being brought up that really demonstrate the genuine problems with your view. The fact that the time can add up. The fact that I've outright demonstrated how a player _can_ come up with character elements without feeling that those elements are important enough to merit being brought up in game. 

First off - as I mentioned in the very post you responded to, 30 seconds can add up. Especially if a character has several small details that the player thought would be cool to include (without expecting that doing so would 'require' them to make a big deal of it at the game table), and some of these small details do have people ask for clarification or comment on them, and if everyone at the table is in the same boat. 

But in the end, however much time that it requires, you _continue_ to ignore the main point - _that time belongs to that player, and that group, and *not to Hussar*_. They are not required to _waste_ time playing the way you want them to, rather than the way _they want to play_. 

Like I said - if you were simply suggesting this... simply saying, "I think your game can be improved by this method of roleplaying I suggest"... I could accept that. But when countless people in this thread are saying that "no, it wouldn't", and giving you many reasons as to why, and you are continuing to insist that they are wrong about how they are playing their game... yeah, I don't get that. 

I asked this before and you ignored it. I'll ask it again: 

Can you truly not accept that some people might feel that time is better spent focusing on more important aspects of their character, or roleplaying about the world around them or the plot, rather than about character details that are not important to them? 

If you are fine with it - if you can accept that other players might not feel that acting like a grotesque racial stereotype is requisite to good roleplaying - then I'm cool with that. If not... then I guess I'm done here, and will continue to be appalled at some of the attitudes that plague this hobby.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 13, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> But is 'good roleplayer' essential for the enjoyment of D&D?  Some people are in it for the tactical exercise.  Other people are in it for catharsis of one sort or another.
> /snip




Nope.  Good roleplayer is not essential for the enjoyment of D&D and I never stated otherwise.

However, "good roleplayer" is essential to being a good roleplayer.  



			
				Mr Myth said:
			
		

> Can you truly not accept that some people might feel that time is better spent focusing on more important aspects of their character, or roleplaying about the world around them or the plot, rather than about character details that are not important to them?
> 
> If you are fine with it - if you can accept that other players might not feel that acting like a grotesque racial stereotype is requisite to good roleplaying - then I'm cool with that. If not... then I guess I'm done here, and will continue to be appalled at some of the attitudes that plague this hobby.




Again, please point to where I stated that you have to act "like a grotesque racial stereotype".  If you would stop rewriting my point and actually look at what I'm saying, you'd see our points are not that far apart.

I'll answer your question with a question.  If you choose an aspect for your character that is never referenced at the table, what purpose does it serve?  If it never comes up, if you, the player in question, don't think it's important enough to ever draw any attention to, why did you choose it?

What's the point of having a beard if you never, ever mention that you have one?

It makes you feel better?  Ok, fine, but, I play D&D and other RPG's as a group exercise.  There are four or five other people around the table.  Anything that exists in your head and no where else adds nothing to the game.

You say I didn't address your points.  I think that I did.  Obviously, if the player is monopolizing time, that's a problem.  Nowhere did I suggest that.  What I suggested is for a player to do something like Wil Wheaton's "Don't call me an elf, elves are our country cousins" comment.  That right there cements an image in everyone's mind about what Wil Wheaton's character is like.  

How is that taking over the game?

Note, just to be absolutely clear here.  I'm in no way talking about a sort of touchy feely concept of "If it feels good you're doing it right" sort of approach to gaming.  I'm SPECIFICALLY talking about role playing, which is only a subset of the entire game.  That's why I keep harping on this time thing.  It's not the focus of the game or the character.  It's a tag line once in a while just to establish basic facts about your character.  

To me, that's what separates a good role player from someone engaging in tactical wargaming.  The difference between a role player and a roll player.

You can have fun with D&D and other RPG's without doing this.  Of course you can.  I've certainly done it and will likely do it again.  But, if you want to be a good role player, then make the effort.  I think you'll find it rewarding and, if you lead by example, the rest of your group will bring up their play as well.


----------



## Barastrondo (Oct 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> I'll answer your question with a question.  If you choose an aspect for your character that is never referenced at the table, what purpose does it serve?  If it never comes up, if you, the player in question, don't think it's important enough to ever draw any attention to, why did you choose it?




The answer is probably, as usual, "for my benefit." The game ultimately takes place in your imagination, and if that aspect of the character is present in your imagination, that is for some people enough. 



> It makes you feel better?  Ok, fine, but, I play D&D and other RPG's as a group exercise.  There are four or five other people around the table.  Anything that exists in your head and no where else adds nothing to the game.




Untrue. It adds something to the game for precisely one person. That's all that really has to be justified, in much the same way that a player isn't obligated to take 30 seconds of roleplaying every now and again to play up that she possesses Dwarven Weapon Training instead of just an ordinary proficiency with axes, or that she gets a racial +2 to Wisdom. 

If other people feel that the absence of these details detracts from their experience, they have the power to politely ask for those details. I just don't think it's fair to talk of the value of character description as valuable _only_ if it impacts other players and not place _any_ responsibility on those other players for eliciting these descriptions. 



> Note, just to be absolutely clear here.  I'm in no way talking about a sort of touchy feely concept of "If it feels good you're doing it right" sort of approach to gaming.  I'm SPECIFICALLY talking about role playing, which is only a subset of the entire game.




Well, your original question was essentially "Why would someone write 'elf' on a character sheet and not play that choice up at the table?" That question was, I think, answered. Maybe the player isn't all that interested in the roleplaying aspect. Maybe some choices are of solely mechanical interest to the player, and not aspects he's interested in having affect his character's personality or bearing. That may not be your favorite style of play, but I think it'd be lousy precedent if there was a movement to ban people from making character selections that they didn't intend to roleplay. 

If we're going with the more specialized question of "If you want all the choices on your character sheet to have a meaningful impact on the group's roleplaying, why don't you call attention to them?", then no, that hasn't been answered. But at that point I think we're talking about entirely theoretical people. If people want a choice on a character sheet to be meaningful to the rest of the group, they'll let everyone know about it without prompting. If they don't or they don't care, this advice doesn't apply to them.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 13, 2009)

I think I missed the question in the scrum, so I'll answer it now.  

How do you present your character without taking up too much time?  Without ado, here's my process:

Hussar's Method for Making Sure Everyone at the Table Knows You're a Half-Elf
[sblock]Without being obnoxious about it.[/sblock]

*Tagline 1.*  Successful Skill Check:

"When I was a child, my mother sent me to live with her people in the Feywild.  While I was there, my uncle told me about these things.  They are... (insert information here)

*Tagline 2.*  Unsuccessful Skill check (used after #1)

"My uncle never told me about these!"

*Tagline 3.*  Smack talk

"You look vaguely familiar, did my uncle leave a tip for your grandmother?"

*Tagline 4.*  Vaguely annoyed.

"Ah man, another flea bitten town.  Let me cover my ears.  Bloody merchants see the points and jack up the prices twenty per cent!"

*Tagline 4.5*  Vaguely annoyed again.

"Ah man, another flea bitten town.  Let me cover my ears.  Last time some yokel thought I was a bloody tiefling and tried to get a priest to exorcise me!"

*Tagline 5*  Expletive

"By the grove of my mother!"

*Tagline 6*  Expletive

"Y'know what?  I come in two halves.  And both of them want you dead!"

There.  That's all it takes.  I came up with that in a few moments.  It doesn't have to take up huge game time, it doesn't have to dominate the game or the character.  Drop one of the above lines in a game from time to time, maybe every session or three and poof!  Everyone know's you're a half elf.

And knowing is half the battle.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> How do you present your character without taking up too much time?  Without ado, here's my process:




The thing is, even those things take up time.  Not much.  But when each and every member of the group has to throw in a tag line like that when making skill checks, encountering a town, meeting new people, and so on...it starts to take significant time.

After the first time we introduce ourselves, so we can get an idea of our character's personalities, we normally reduce it down to "We introduce ourselves" the next time.  When we encounter a town, we say "We enter the town and find an inn".

We've had players attempt to use these moments for "personal roleplaying", and it gets other members of our group annoyed.  We have one player in particular who likes to play up one character trait and mention it whenever possible.  He has a Shifter who likes to mention that "My ancestors used to EAT your kind, you know?" all the time.  Every time we disagree with a decision he makes, he's sure to say something like that again.  If we go into a town, he likes to say "My ancestors would not have been allowed into a town like this".

We know he's a Shifter.  We don't care.  All it does is slow the game down him mentioning it over and over again.  We care about getting to the town so we can protect it from the oncoming Giant horde so we can get on with our quest than we care about him mentioning that he's a Shifter again.  He's our Cleric first and Shifter second.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 13, 2009)

NO NO NO.

Gack.

Jeez, I agree with you.  If it's coming up "Every single time" then yes, it's a problem.  Sure, I totally, 110% agree with you.  If it's coming up so often that it's actually annoying, then yes, it should get scaled down a bit.

But, just because it can be a problem if overdone, does not mean that it should NEVER be done.  

You can overdo anything.  Does that mean I should never role play any aspect of a character?  I should simply be Fytor GoodwithSwords?  And my good friend Father Generic and his trusty sidekick, Weezard?

Come on.  Yes.  Extremes exist on the far side of things.  I know this.  I accept it.  

But it certainly does not excuse NEVER bringing it up either.

You say that you know he's a Shifter.  Ok, fine.  What are the races of the other character's in your group?  Can you name them?  If so, then mission accomplished, move on, nothing to see here.  If not, then a bit of effort might be a good thing to create well rounded characters.

BTW, "My ancestor used to eat your kind" is a great tagline.  Like all spices, it should be used with care, but, it's still funny the first time.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Oct 13, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Jeez, I agree with you.  If it's coming up "Every single time" then yes, it's a problem.  Sure, I totally, 110% agree with you.  If it's coming up so often that it's actually annoying, then yes, it should get scaled down a bit.



Meh, I think at this point, he's settled down from mentioning it all the time.  But he did it often enough that if he EVER does it again, I'll be forced to beat him upside the head for it.  Well, maybe not...we play at his house.  *grin*



Hussar said:


> You can overdo anything.  Does that mean I should never role play any aspect of a character?  I should simply be Fytor GoodwithSwords?  And my good friend Father Generic and his trusty sidekick, Weezard?



In a way, yes.  We play a very plot based game.  The goal is to figure out how to solve the plot and work together in order to get it done.

Whether someone is a Shifter or not holds no bearing on whether he uses a Healing Word on me this round of combat or whether he wants to look for the magic items or search the library for information about our foe.

Well, unless you want to stereotype the race.  You could say that being a Shifter he doesn't have the patience or intelligence to want to do the book reading thing and therefore will decide to go find magic items instead.  Or, we could just establish that he can pick either option regardless of his race...which means his race doesn't matter.

I admit, members of my group are...impatient when it comes to roleplaying.  They'll allow a small bit of roleplaying when it seems appropriate.  Preferably limited to one liners to avoid slowing down the game.



Hussar said:


> But it certainly does not excuse NEVER bringing it up either.



Certainly not never.  We all mentioned it in our descriptions when we were level 1.  That was 6 months ago, of course.



Hussar said:


> You say that you know he's a Shifter.  Ok, fine.  What are the races of the other character's in your group?  Can you name them?  If so, then mission accomplished, move on, nothing to see here.  If not, then a bit of effort might be a good thing to create well rounded characters.



Ironically enough, because of this thread I put this to the test a couple of weeks ago.  I pointed out that I had no idea what race at least half the party was, since it had never really come up.  I mentioned this thread and it seems the sentiment in the group was "Sure, it never came up...but it just isn't that important."

I know our Warlock is a Warforged.  But I had no idea for the first 4 or 5 sessions.  I thought he was a Tiefling...I think just because he acted kind of "evil" and was a Warlock.  I only found out he was a Warforged when he told us he was holding 1 Sword and 2 Rods in order to get the benefit of all 3 properties.  I asked him how and he said "Embedded Components.  That's the reason I'm playing a Warforged."  I know his name is Rock.  That might have been a hint...but it wasn't.  When I brought up this thread to him and said "I had no idea you were a Warforged for the first 5 or 6 sessions, by the way.  You don't really do anything to roleplay the fact that you are a Warforged", he replied, "I don't know how to roleplay a Warforged.  There's nothing you can do to roleplay them."  I laughed.  He didn't get it.

Our Wizard...I found out he was an Eladrin after I brought up this thread.  I only know he's the guy who abuses Lasting Frost.  When I think back, I did have one hint he was Eladrin a couple of sessions ago when we got transported to the Feywild and he mentioned being back home.  I only remember that his name is Immeral, which people keep mispronouncing Emeril.  So every time his initiative comes up, I yell out "BAM!"

Our Cleric is the aforementioned Shifter.  We know him.

Our Barbarian is a Minotaur.  He doesn't let us forget it.  He is a charging specialist who likes to gore people with his horns.  Also, his name is Moostafa.

We have a Warlord.  I...still don't know what race he is.  It was told to me 2 weeks ago when I mentioned this thread.  I've forgotten again.  It's not important enough for me to remember.  The player of this character switches characters every second week or so.  We're used to him just "getting bored" with his character so often, we barely remember who they are anymore.

We're just focused on finding the materials we need to make magic items in order to defeat the big bad guy right now.  I'm fairly certain my character doesn't much care if the people helping him save the world are Shifters or Humans or Mind Flayers...as long as they are helping.  And they don't hurt trees.  Or Rocks.  Rocks are my friends.

Oh, I'm a Dwarven Warden.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 14, 2009)

> I admit, members of my group are...impatient when it comes to roleplaying. They'll allow a small bit of roleplaying when it seems appropriate. Preferably limited to one liners to avoid slowing down the game.




Thus, and I'm rather sorry to say it, my point of "not very good role play".  I'm absolutely not casting any aspersions on how much fun you are having.  If that's the way you want to play, fill your boots.  Go for it.

I don't.

That's why it was my rant, and not general advice.  I absolutely don't want to play this way.  And I don't want to play in a group that plays this way.  Yes, I do consider it bad role playing.  How can I not?

That doesn't mean you're not having fun, or that your game is bad for you.  It is bad for me though.


----------



## MrMyth (Oct 14, 2009)

Hussar said:


> That's why it was my rant, and not general advice.  I absolutely don't want to play this way.  And I don't want to play in a group that plays this way.  Yes, I do consider it bad role playing.  How can I not?




And that is where I end up fundamentally disagreeing with you, since I think someone not focusing on one specific aspect of their character does not make for bad roleplaying. If being half-elven isn't important to the core of the character, they should be free to roleplay what matters to them. Similarly, if I want to develop an intricate character background and elements, but don't feel the need to run through a checklist in game to show them all off, I don't view that as bad roleplaying. And I'm frankly insulted when you claim that it is.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 17, 2009)

I'm sorry you feel insulted.

But, how can you consider it good role playing to ignore a pretty fundamental element of a character?

Again, why make a choice with your character and NEVER bring it to the table?  How is it good role playing to make any choice (not just race) and then never, ever bring it to the table?

You don't need to focus on it, you don't need to weave it into the fabric of your existence.  But, IMO, you do need to make everyone aware of it in order to have a well rounded character portrayal.  At least to the point where no one is shocked to discover that you are whatever you are.  If six months into a campaign, one of the players turns to you and says, "You're a what?  Since when?"  then that's a pretty serious failing in role play.

And you can replace the what with anything - race, gender, whatever.  

To be 100% honest, I don't understand how ignoring character elements can be considered good role playing?  How far does that go?  At what point does it become bad roleplaying?  If I never bother to portray anything about my character and simply use him as an avatar in the game world, that would be considered bad role play.

To me, if it's on your character sheet, it should come out some time during the campaign.  It doesn't matter if it's race, gender, character background, whatever.  If it doesn't hit the table, it's just wasted space and opportunity.

I've always wondered though, why is it only elf players who do this?  No one else seems to have any problems conveying race.  It's only the people, IME, who play elves (to be honest, Omyn's the first half-elf I can remember seeing in a VERY long time.  2e era to be certain.    Least played race after gnomes IME)


----------



## Theroc (Oct 17, 2009)

When I play human characters, I never ever play up the fact that I am human.  I almost never even mention it, unless prompted by another player sayin, "My race does this!"

Is it bad roleplaying not to periodically reinforce the idea that I am human?  Or is not doing so okay because we default to human if a race isn't mentioned?


----------



## Pseudonym (Oct 17, 2009)

I can't believe this thread is still going.


----------



## Inyssius (Oct 17, 2009)

Hussar said:


> But, how can you consider it good role playing to ignore a pretty fundamental element of a character?




Who are you to tell me what the fundamental elements of my character are?


----------



## Tallifer (Oct 17, 2009)

Inyssius said:


> Who are you to tell me what the fundamental elements of my character are?




The problem with modern Western culture is that no one wants to hear any instruction from anyone. At my workplace, most new employees come with attitude. In the gaming world, most new players do not want to learn how to roleplay... nor conversely do most roleplayers want to learn tactics.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 18, 2009)

Inyssius said:


> Who are you to tell me what the fundamental elements of my character are?




Again, how is the race of your character not a fundamental aspect of that character?

And, again, I'll ask, how much can I ignore the character sheet before I'm no longer role playing?

And, as far as humans go, I'll admit it doesn't bother me.  Probably because the default assumptions (or at least my default assumptions  ) usually lead to a humanocentric world, which pretty much defaults PC's to being human.

I've never seen anyone surprised by someone being human.


----------



## Inyssius (Oct 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Again, how is the race of your character not a fundamental aspect of that character?




My bard is human, but that's hardly one of his defining aspects. Without changing *anything* about him, he could be a half-elf raised in the city, or an eladrin, or a city-born elf. He could be a halfling or a gnome. He could even be a deva. He could be a dwarf--though in my current campaign dwarves don't come with their usual baggage, which _would_ otherwise make him into a different person. 

His looks would change slightly, but he would not otherwise be a different character.



> And, again, I'll ask, how much can I ignore the character sheet before I'm no longer role playing?



Are you telling me I'm not really roleplaying? Because I know a couple of people who might disagree with that assessment.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 18, 2009)

No, Inyssius, I'm saying you're not roleplaying the character that's on the sheet.  IOW, you aren't roleplaying as well as you could be.

If you could replace the race of your character with any other race, you've failed to portray a pretty basic element of your character.  Or, to put it another way, announce at the table next week that your character is an Eladrin and see what reaction you get.

If everyone nods, and says, "Well of course, that's what I always thought" then you are doing a great job of portraying an eladrin.  If everyone looks at you blankly and says, "What?  You're an eladrin?  Since when?" then you did a very poor job of portraying an eladrin.

Please, everyone keeps expanding this beyond my original point.  I don't care how well you portray the rest of your character.  It could be great, it could be bad, that's not what I'm talking about.  I'm confining this to the race of your character.  

And, please answer the question - how much of my character sheet can I ignore before I'm no longer roleplaying?  You misread that to mean that I'm accusing you of something.  I'm not.  I'm trying to show a point.

If I can ignore race, gender, and apparently appearance without changing the character and still be considered to be roleplaying well (note the well part of that), how much else can I ignore?  Alignment?  (well, in 4e you might)  Class?  Religion?  Ability scores?

How far does it go?  Race is like the first thing you choose about your character in pretty much every edition of D&D.  It's the first section after abilities.  Doesn't that mean that race is at least as important as anything else on your character sheet?

Or, at least important enough that it deserves to be mentioned once every three or four sessions for 30 seconds?  Important enough that everyone else at the teble should know what it is?

For the last time, Do you need to make this a defining characteristic of your character?  NO, absolutely not.  I NEVER said that, although people have ascribed it to me enough times that I understand why other might make that mistake.

It is, IMO, however, a characteristic of your character and, as such, deserves a minimum of air time to establish at the table.  That's all.  I'm NOT claiming anything more than that.  Just that it should be established in the minds of the other players so that no one is surprised when it is brought up in play.  That's all.

Anything beyond that is entirely up to you.


----------



## Theroc (Oct 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> And, as far as humans go, I'll admit it doesn't bother me.  Probably because the default assumptions (or at least my default assumptions  ) usually lead to a humanocentric world, which pretty much defaults PC's to being human.
> 
> I've never seen anyone surprised by someone being human.




But those humans are still roleplaying poorly, because they aren't playing up the stereotype of their race.  Why isn't that human playing up his apparent lack of respect for history due to his shorter collective memory that the other races have?  Why isn't his ambition indicating his human nature?  Why isn't his shorter lifespan being brought in conversation as a reminder that he doesn't live as long as the others?  Their innovative nature, why isn't that being played up?

Humans have as many distinctions as the other races really, insofar as differences from the others.  In my experiences people tend to roleplay most races as having human nature 'rub off' on them in many respects.  The assumption that every PC is human doesn't suddenly make it 'okay' to not emphasize it if that expectation is there for other races.  

In case anyone was wondering, I took the human qualities from the 3.5 PHB.

~shrug~  I will try to refrain from commenting more, as I realize Hussar was simply having a rant, and not actually trying to change anyone's roleplaying views, I just see his position as flawed in some respects.

I agree that race shouldn't be entirely in the background, but I also feel the roleplayers should not feel that the race they select is a straight jacket, and feel the need to setup a checklist of things to emphasize to ensure they aren't 'playing their character wrong'.

Also, I'd like to note that during combat in 4E one's race will likely become apparent, if a Character uses Dragonbreath, they are either a Dragonborn, or a Dragonborn Revenant... if a PC uses the Memory of a Thousand Lifetimes ability for a bonus toward a roll, well, chances are they are a Deva.  If a character uses an at-will ability that isn't from their selected class, they are a Half-Elf.


----------



## Hussar (Oct 18, 2009)

Theroc said:
			
		

> ...because they aren't playing up the stereotype of their race




HOLY CRAP.  How many times do I have to repeat myself?  Do people even bother reading?  I already posted upthread a bit how you could portray yourself as a half-elf without resorting to a SINGLE stereotype.  Not one.  Not a single one.

Yet every bloody post begins with me somehow saying that everyone should play stereotypes.

WTF :[


----------



## Thasmodious (Oct 18, 2009)

For what it's worth, Hussar, I've just seen this thread, read it, and agree with you pretty much completely, and identify with the elf problem.  Have some xp to soothe your head bruises from banging against a wall for 11 pages.  

Edit:  You must spread some XP around before giving it Hussar again.  Well, good intentions and 3.95+tax and I can buy a latte.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 18, 2009)

Hussar said:


> No, Inyssius, I'm saying you're not roleplaying the character that's on the sheet.  IOW, you aren't roleplaying as well as you could be.




I would venture to say that is better said as, "_IMHO_, you aren't roleplaying as well as you could be".

Let us be straight here - "role playing" is not a well-defined, objective thing.  We here, all gamers, do not generally even agree on a definition of what it is!  The ability to gauge how "well" a person undertakes the activity is _entirely subjective_.

There is no strong enough authority on what role paying is to pass judgment in general on who is doing it well.  Gygax himself could not get everyone on board that there's only one way to go about it, so darn tootin' nobody here is going to be able to do it.

So, I'm going to strongly suggest that people stop talking as if they know the One True Way, and all other Ways are lacking, lesser, or insufficient.


----------

