I mean, technically he is just a lich… Who so happens to have a cult that worships him, which somehow gave his incorporeal spirit power during his short absence after the defeat at the hands of his right-hand lieutenant, Kas, and has absorbed the power of a lesser deity to use as his own while escaping from imprisonment by the Lady of Pain for a failed plot to usurp the cosmic order when he infiltrated Sigil, the City of Doors.

So, not a god, just a lich with the power of a God.

Haha petty semantics!

This right here is what makes it roleplaying.

You as the player know what to do to move the story forward. Just need to figure out how the character you built would go from Point A to Point B, then roleplay doing it, even if it means they bumble their way through it like a clown.

Let the DM worry about what skills you need, if you even need them at all; the only thing the player has to do is describe their actions and their intentions.

A good DM will make sure you fail forward.

This is an out of character problem that should be addressed by talking to your players at session 0 …The manner in which you create characters is irrelevant here because it’s an interpersonal issue, not a mechanical or narrative one.

It is actually both, considering that it is entirely about how problematic players design their characters to be problematic. In a roleplay game, the narrative is an interpersonal narrative, which means interpersonal issues are linked to narrative issues.

Which is exactly why I made the Session 0 plan that I did. Don’t need to rely on good faith when you pre-bake it into the character creation. It has worked flawlessly for getting rid of problem players.

Because I’ve seen it work many times with very ordinary players. Ordinary, but participating in good faith, which is the bare minimum. If you don’t have good faith, you shouldn’t be playing.

Unfortunately, it fails more often than it works, because everyone thinks they are in good faith from their perspective, even the edgy loner wolf player. Because everyone goes into a game with different expectations. Which is why I built my session 0 to avoid the problem altogether by setting strict expectations of players and their characters.

I am participating in good faith. You’re just not understandstanding me. Don’t be a dick and police my tone just because you fail to understand my perspective. That’s arguing in bad faith.

Like for beginners just learning that’s fine.

But the amount of players I’ve DM’d for who always play the exact same character that is just “idealistic version of self” with different coats of paint is way too damn high.

Forget that for average people it is incredibly difficult to put themselves into the perspective of others, much less hold a continuous train of logic based on that perspective, which is what roleplaying is all about.

Dice-less, narrative games are so much fun. Sadly finding a good group for it is like pulling teeth, at least in my area.

*Sad theater kid noises*

DM: “Alright, so your character walks off after refusing to go along with the group. Okay. Well, guess you can pack up and we will see you next session. I don’t have anything planned other than what the group is doing, so, guess you won’t be playing today. Bye.”

Make it sting. Refuse to let them roll a new character and have them do the walk of shame. They made their choice So they can deal with the consequences of them.

You’re missing the entire point by what I mean by “effectively the same” and the point of my argument.

There are only ever two choices: your characters know each other beforehand, or the don’t. Being forced to work together or working together by choice is irrelevant to what I’m talking about.

if the party is not planned together to be a cohesive group that are all guaranteed to have a motivation to play the written campaign AND have at least a reason to trust the party members, regardless of if they have personal history or not, is my method for avoiding the inevitable player who wants to bitch about not belong allowed to play their “edgy loner”.

As I said before, even with literally using the threat of death forcing the character to work with the party, there is ALWAYS that one dipshit who wants to bitch and moan about how I’m “railroading them/preventing them from roleplaying their character” by doing so. Or, they waste time trying to argue for some loophole to go off and do their own thing, separate from the party yet somehow still “technically” doing the job. I am speaking from personal experience of over 10 years as a DM.

The other key thing about in media res is that you don’t have that “inevitable round of introductions that feels like that time at the start of school when everyone had to stand up to say their name and one interesting fact about them”. You’re thrown into doing things before there’s any chance for that. You get to know each other not beforehand, as in case 2, but as the adventure is going.

Yes, the characters are. The players, on the other hand, are all just sitting around a table rolling dice with no sense of urgency. They roll their dice, the encounter is over, and then the customary introductions start cause everyone is wondering what the other players have created for their character. Like, either you have been incredibly lucky with groups or have let Critical Roll give you rosey glasses about the role-play capabilities of the average player if you think doing things in media res makes a difference here.

I avoid all of this by just doing it in Session 0 with the afformentioned rules about character creation. It works. Ever since, I’ve never had to deal with it or any of the annoyances I have talked about.

Also, no, BG3 is not a good example. It is a video game that doesn’t have to deal with fumbling IRL people who all have differing expectations and preferences. See, the biggest thing about the BG3 cast, is that the characters were all built in such a way so that they work together. Which is exactly what I have done with my method of character creation.

In media res will require players be cooperative enough to care to act, but it doesn’t require they trust each other or know each other immediately. It definitely doesn’t require pre-written specifically-designed characters.

See, the problem I have been talking about is that my method guarantees that players are cooperative enough to care to act that’s the entire point of why I do it how I do it. Again, I am speaking from direct personal experience across 10+ years as a DM. Problem players will find a way to be a problem. So I nip it in the bud with a method that doesn’t have to rely on the good-faith of the player, cause I’ve been burned by it more times than I can count.

“Strangers meet in a tavern and awkwardly introduce themselves” is just an example of “random group forced to team up”. Whether they start in a tavern and are all hired by the same benefactor or were all captives being held on an Ithillid nautilus that crashed landed and discovered they all had brain worms, it’s the same thing, effectively.

I’ve tried the whole “use McGuffin to literally force the party to work together” and still get roadblocked by that one inevitable player who insists on being the “edgy loner who has to be dragged into everything”. Yes, even with the threat of death, they usually just waste time trying to argue how “that’s what [their] character would do! [I’m] just punishing [them] for playing [their] character! Reee!”

Still, on another point, players will still have to do the whole rigamarole of character introductions that always feels like the first day at school unless the characters were made together during session 0 anyway. I just nip all of that in the bud by just eliminating that from my table through the previously stated method: starting in media res with a party that has been pre-established, together with each other to ensure party cohesion, during session 0.

BG3 works because the cast of characters are all pre-written, specifically designed to work with that story, being that it is a video game. Real players, unfortunately unless you find a unicorn, do not roleplay on the level of professionally hand-crafted characters.

Picture a tavern setting where they’re arguing about different plot hooks, missions, and tips, and start to switch from the selfish motivations of wanting cool loot to also wanting to uncover the story.

Yea, this is exactly what I’m purposely trying to avoid with a Session 0. I, as the DM, list the plot hooks of the campaign I have prepared to run and players create characters around them that are guaranteed to be invested in the story as well as be cohesive with each other.

No arguing needed. If anyone wants to argue, they know where the door is.

Yea, I don’t DM those types of games.

How would they not? Session 0 we create characters together, anyone who doesn’t follow the previously stated rules can leave my table.

The entire point is to prevent the creation of “rando loner who just sits in a corner and sulks”.

For me, the tired trope of “strangers meet in a tavern” approach is the inevitable round of introductions that feels like that time at the start of school when everyone had to stand up to say their name and one interesting fact about them. It’s just awkward and everyone wants it to be over quickly.

Much better to just create characters together in session 0. Everyone already knows each other, their motivations, prior relationships established, etc… and just begin the campaign as if everyone is already on mission.

Biggest pet peeve with players. This is why, during session 0, I make players pre-establish a reason that they not only go along with the party and the planned campaign but also a reason why they trust at least two other characters.

What?

‘I wish to end all war.’

“Okay, wish granted. All wars will never end”

Make it make sense.

Yea. I never could get into how Tumblr worked. Nothing made sense.