Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
Interesting analogy.
Thanks.

Hmmm… the Fantastic Four could be created to explore what happens to existing bonds when super powers get added to the mix. But does that prevent the Silver Surfer from sitting at the same table? Depends on the group, I suppose.
Right: Surfer may have to wait until the "Second Movie" to join, but if you had (or created) a Spiderman-variant; that could be more immediately accepted by the group.

Personally, I not only prefer groups that can play complex, multi-layer tunes rather than just one-layer melodies, I consider such talent an indicator of their overall skill.
Well, I like to think that I'm at least a decent DM, but I'm not sure how well I'd be able to have the Mariachi Band sound like the Philharmonic Symphony…..

Actually, Quertus is just so good at business, his shop (like his other business ventures) are a source of debt. In the end, Quertus adventures to fund his businesses.
Aha. I see. LoL.

Really, you've got the wrong impression of me - very much so, in fact - if you think I'm adverse to "negative effects".
I'm adverse to "illogical effects" ("congratulations, because you've run the dumbest shop in Waterdeep, we're declaring you King")
Nah, you've got me pegged wrong.
My apologies.
Was my "Villain" within the Bounds of Acceptance for you?

Illogical effects do "break verisimilitude" for me, as well.

and "inconsiderate GMs" ("I know you've put a lot of work into your backstory; watch me take a **** on it"). Now, when those negative effects feel like "narrative contrivances" instead of proper Simulationist logic? Yeah, I'll be opposed. But I'll be opposed on the grounds of them being "narrative contrivances", not because they are "negative effects".
"Incurably" Inconsiderate GMs find an empty seat at their table.


(EDIT: unless you mean "negative effects to me, or to the group's fun", like giving us lead poisoning, taking a dump on my backstory, or railroading the plot through a self-insert über GMPC, in which case, yes, I'm opposed to "negative effects")
Actually, so am I. Powerful "important" leadership Characters are expected. The GM trying to put their Dream PC into the group? No, thanks!

… there are very few scenarios (in 3e, at least) where that scenario wouldn't trigger alarm bells that this GM is too dumb to run a game. Conventional wisdom says that muggles are UP to begin with, but become even more unplayable when denied WBL.
To me WBL was a two edged sword.
Sure, it can make creating a higher level PC faster and easier.

But, it was also used to "justify" automatically getting anything that was wanted for the PC, because (magic) items were "within the price range" that WBL gave.

Added to the "Magic Shop" that (like Starbucks) seemed to be in every town, and always had every magic item in stock - regardless of where the PC/s went ("I'm a #20th level# knight from >Fantasy London< magically Teleported and lost somewhere in >Post Apocalyptic Outer Mongolia<, but when I walk into the town of Sueveryone, I conveniently find the Old Magic Shop and buy myself a (3x D&D 15-20 crit range, where my Improved Critical feat dropped that to 12-20 crit) +5 Keen Vorpal* Scimitar."
*Exaggerating, but only a little*)
- meant that a lot of DMs felt that magic items were reduced to being mundane.

Kinda like how someone from the 1800 would find a 1950s car a "fantastic piece of machinery", where someone from the 2000s would most likely consider it an "impractical relic".

5e got rid of the "you never get less than Xx gold" that WBL represented, and made magic items a lot harder to obtain, assuming the DM uses/allows them at all.

At least, that's how I currently understand what the 5e Devs intended.

Setting aside how bad that particular example is, there are two possibilities - and I've encountered both. One possibility is exactly as you'd expect, and I'll choose to bring a different character - one where the playing piece matches the table.
I did like seeing that you're willing to change Characters, to meet the group.

[QUOTE]Actually, honestly, me choosing to be "not from around here", and not having those connections to draw on, you'd think you'd have noticed that I regularly give myself Disadvantage to my characters[QUOTE]

(Sorry if misquoted, using my phone is a pain)

Was not noticeable to me, at first.

So, grabbing two modules off the shelf… ugh, these are horrific examples: in one, the party has to jump through hoops just to get hired (in a roundabout way) to help some people; in the other, there's strong rails and obvious "adventure this way" signs… that the party could realistically ignore, and just walk right past the adventure. So, bad examples.
I suppose I might be a little more "the opposite".
Before 2012 (when I retired) I simply didn't have the time to do Homemade Campaign World Building.

As such, I was always just grabbing a module. Now, I'd read what the "Plot" was, and then I'd see if there was a way to use "hooks" from the PC/s Background/Backstory to get the Players interested in becoming involved in the Plot.

I have been known to pick a random Village to start the game in, and place the "Starting" Clues to at least three "Modules" there. Then just sit back and let the Players decide which to investigate, or choosing something new, like exploring the wilderness around (formally Nameless Village) instead.

So, freehand it is.

Used to be, being big into role-playing,
I was also big into "fog of war", limiting player knowledge to what the character could know.
To me there is a difference between "fog of war" and "incompatible PC"

Like the Knight PC knows most everything about the city the game starts in, but might not know anything about the Areas around there.

Like Barterville: everyone from there knows that the Dwarven Mines are North, the Elven Forest is West, and Getbent City is East, but no details about any of those places is really known.

No-one should be surprised when the Knight tells the Assassin that he's not going to be involved in killing "the good and just king" for money.
(Although it should be obvious from Session 1 that having both the Knight and Assassin in the same party could be a problem)

Oh, and yes, I'm all about making Bonds in game.
Always fun.

Yes, I've had lots of bad experiences. From them, and from the good experiences, I've learned the hard way what interface to the character is reasonable for a good GM to want, and what interface to the character is the equivalent of sending my bank account information as proof of my identity.
I guess that I've never had to give "proof of identity" for any of my PCs.

You need to know how to tie my character into the adventure? That's reasonable. Let's discuss the parts of my character and the parts of the adventure necessary to make that happen.
No, I don't want to read the module, and no, you shouldn't want to read my backstory.
For myself, I prefer at least some mystery to the game.

So, "new PC" is not some magic bullet to change "not giving out PC information". In fact, I'd hold information about a new PC much closer to the chest than that of an existing character.
Why? When all the other Players are creating "teens with connections" where they all grew up in the same town and "have known each other all their lives" - are you going to create someone that isn't from the town and that no one knows, just to "be the outsider"?

Note: some Classes tend to encourage this.
Barbarian, Druid, and Ranger tend to be "natural outsiders" to all the "civilized" Classes.

And yet, it's amazing how often you meet the mysterious cloaked figure (Strider) in the town bar.

Time spent playing the character is, IME, richer than backstory, so, in that regard, they'd be correct. Time spent in the current game, and connections to that world, are worth more than being "Ali, Prince of Ababwa" (or was that supposed to be his family name?), so in that regard, they'd be very wrong-minded.
Heh.
Aladdin makes a poor Team player example.

Abu as a Familiar is neat.

Genie is too much Deus Ex Machina.

Carpet was - what? Other than transportation, that occasional helped during a fight.

Jasmine was the Plot Goal, with Jafar being an obstacle to that. (Mostly as a side project to getting power)

The Seven Dwarves (without Snow White) at least come close to being teammates.
(If you don't mind playing zero level Characters)

Perception issues can usually be fixed with liberal application of a clue-by-four.
Showing the clue = great.

Being beaten upside the head with it?
Not no much.