Page 793 in Cocoyashi Village
first Latest
Page 793

first Previous Next Latest
Average Rating: 5
Number of people who have voted: 2

By the same author as Grand Line 3.5


18th Jan 2016, 1:19 AM

Personally I'm all about the entirety of D&D, both the mechanics as well as the roleplaying aspects, but personally I really only want to get into things if the people involved take things seriously. It's no fun having a DM that keeps a game going long past when they care about a session and it's also very disheartening if you're trying to tell a story or run a battle and your players are taking excessive amounts of breaks or deviating from the game in their conversations.

As opposed to being story time, give your thoughts on how "seriously" you take any given session when playing with others, and what kind of playstyle you prefer.

edit delete reply


18th Jan 2016, 3:39 AM

I've found that when one plays with any group for a decent amount of time a rapport is built. For the group I'm a part of, we tend to keep things relaxed. We're there to have fun, part of that is playing the game, part of it is making smart aleck remarks and snarky comments, and part of it is learning new tips and tricks. That's not to say we can't be serious. We can, even if half the time it is PvP to determine who's paying for pizza (the other half the time involves boss battles and anytime we get the feeling the DM's drawn inspiration from Tomb of Horrors).

edit delete reply


18th Jan 2016, 1:42 PM

Most of the games I've been in have been very full of 'comradery' in a way- jokey, full of references, a very loose playstyle.

Sadly, the majority of the time this is because most of the players aren't taking things seriously at all, and so there's almost no story at all. The one time I DMed a long-term game it had a nice mix of both.

However, I think that I'd very, very much enjoy a strict RP environment- it's part of the reason I've been so interested in LARP.

edit delete reply


18th Jan 2016, 2:59 PM

That's about what the first campaign I was a part of was like, somewhat encouraged by the DM who would only have the initial encounter of a session planned out and would adlib everything after that (leading to situations like us needing to find a flux capacitor for a time travel spell and a religion forming around the idea that a Jack Black look-alike playing an eternal guitar solo was what reignited the sun and keeps it burning).

Of course, even he could only take so much. One day he brought in a pair of friends who had claimed to have had plenty of tabletop gaming experience. The characters they created? "Foot-long John" and a character who was "dressed like Patrick Swayze in Road House" and came from "the year 1989". Needless to say, they proceed to absolutely wreck what semblance of seriousness we had. Thankfully they had to leave early, after which the DM apologized profusely, promised that he would never invite them back, and had their characters killed of by divine intervention as soon as we resumed.

As for my personal preference, the reference-filled, loose game can be fun but I prefer a more serious campaign where the story is structured and the comedy comes from the results of bad/critical rolls and the ridiculousness of a bard helping to reform a trio of pirates by teaching them to play improvised percussion instruments as way of making an honest living.

edit delete reply


18th Jan 2016, 6:22 PM

I've recently started running a game of Cthulhutech (anime-flavored sci-fi mythos setting), which would imply a fairly serious game, but my group can't handle that style. Everyone spends most of the time joking around, laughing, having a really light-hearted evening, which I'm perfectly okay with. It makes the moments where the story takes a hard turn into mind-bending horror that much more effective, in my opinion.

edit delete reply


19th Jan 2016, 2:06 PM

My players enjoy going serious with roleplaying. They stay in character, and just because someone else is another PC doesn't prevent betrayals, conflict etc if it makes sense story-wise. This creates lots of in-game conflict (not necessarily combat). The characters have similar long term goals so even if they play selfish douchebags, generally working together is beneficial to prevent full scale pvp, but it is common for certain people to do something behind other's backs etc. Only restriction I put at them at character creation is asking them to make characters that can realistically travel and fight together.

They also want to possess as little out of character knowledge as possible. There are scenes where a character acts alone, the other players actually leave the room so they don't know what's going on.

I'm not forcing this behaviour as a DM, I told them that it's totally fine for them to stay during each other's scenes if they get bored of waiting around, because I'm confident that they can seperate out of character knowledge when roleplaying, but they prefer the suspense of not knowing anything out-of-character over a bit inaction.

edit delete reply


8th Nov 2017, 8:08 PM

Well, i guess each group will have it's own preferences. each players individually, actually.
I think the more important is that everyone in the table agree on how to play, so that everyone can have his fun. Which is not to say that everyone should see the game in the same way, just that the group have to be compatible with each others.
here for exemple, Cory still have trouble with the whole Roleplaying thing, and DM as a player won't cut it with the others aside from the munchkin trio. I do think they'll learn. GM is doing a rather good job since he try to give something to please everyone.

I personally mostly play to imagine crazy things and see if they actually work. the kind of anecdote you'll remember with a good laugh. And we tend to go lightly with the rules, mostly playing for the "imagination" part of things.Still with a plot, which can get rather thick sometimes. And usually with a lot of combat, just that we take it less in a "number and math".

edit delete reply

Leave a Comment