Tabletop Community Watch

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

In my experience anyone who whines about 'red flag' races either doesn't actually play games or plays them exclusively with randoms/faggots online which, yeah, big surprise that the person you're dealing with is probably a loser freak, they can't even get four friends together to play DnD.

One of the best players I've ever had played a Tiefling, then a bird person.

Vet your players a little, you don't need to ban everything that isn't a human fighter.

To me, there's no such thing as a red flag anything (except Kender) when it comes to the game itself. If its a player option, its mean to be played, and I have no problem a player merely using what the book literally offered them as an option to use.

For example, some other guy further up the thread said this:

Good way to avoid this is to make games where only races available are Humans, Dwarves, and Elves

And I'm like, "Nigga what?" This is a fantasy game! And you literally only want people to play the most boring options?

Here's the long and short of it. It doesn't matter what options you offer, if you've got annoying idiots at the table, they will still be annoying idiots regardless.

If its an option in the game, I've got no problems with a player playing a Tabaxi, or a half-ork, or a Tiefling. But that's because I don't play with random assholes I don't know on the internet. I'm not even one of those types of players who necessarily plays all the non-human races myself (most, if not all, of my characters have been human). I just understand that ultimately a character's utility and annoyingness comes down to the player, not anything written in the book. Except Kender, fuck those guys.

Ultimately, there's no red flag class, race, etc. But an individual player may have red flags that indicate they are not good to play with. That's what one should focus on. But that's just me. The real answer to the red flag question is to avoid playing with random knuckleheads online and if you do play with random people online, vet them to the best of your ability.

 

[Corn Flakes]

Y'all are taking this "red flag" term way too seriously.

We all know that stereotypes exist for a reason, and of course we're not going to seriously apply them to people we know well and have played with before. But after helping with probably close to 50 demo/public games in the past 13 years (plus a fair few one-shots/short campaigns online), I know damn well that if I get a new player and he's coming in with a "quirky" Tabaxi rogue or a Kobold sorcerer, I should probably expect some idiocy. Would I ban him from my table outright just because he wanted to play something that I know is statistically associated with dumb shit or drama? Of course not, that's like banning perfectly reasonable black players because their fellow melanin-Americans have a habit of stealing shit. But at least the guy being stupid won't come as a surprise, and I won't feel bad at all voting to kick him if he is a jackass and, most importantly, unwilling to learn or change his ways for the better.

And if he does turn out to be a good player who knows how to handle "quirky" characters well? Awesome. I'll be pleasantly surprised instead.

ETA: and yeah, this shit about restricting races is just stupid. My GM restricts certain races/classes (usually by just saying "new players get the PHB options starting out") to people he doesn't know well enough to trust with less conventional character concepts, but that's not because the races/classes themselves are wrong (well, Firbolg are fucking stupid) but because new people need vetting when they show up at a table.

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

I love reading what everyone's red flags are because most of the characters I make fall into those categories. In my current group I've done the following:
Hobgoblin Fighter
Tabaxi Hexblade
Tabaxi Monk
Tiefling Sorcerer
Fairy Paladin
Lizardman Ranger
Risen (aka Frankenstein) Fighter
Minotaur Fighter
Female High Elf Paladin
Female High Elf Wizard
Female Aasimar Warlock
Kobold Thief
Bugbear Cleric

 

[Mega Black]

And I'm like, "Nigga what?" This is a fantasy game! And you literally only want people to play the most boring options?

They don't want people playing not kosher options because they're scared someone might be a furry or a liberal.

 

[Smoke Manmuscle]

This does remind me, and I got to thinking while posting another question, but; what about Shadowrun? For anyone that's run that game, are there any character options or races or gear or such that comes across as a red flag? Because I know that some race choices in the game - like Changelings and Drakes - tend to be difficult to run; what do you guys think about people trying to run these types of characters?

Pixies, AI, Otaku (I refuse to call them technomancers). I flat out banned all but the base 5 races by pointing out that there are maybe .1% of the world population of each of the other races. Considering that shadow runners are made up of .01% of that. It becomes really easy to figure out who just hit your secret lab.

I had a table that had a Pixie and they were using the inherent stealth to disable and hack doors and cameras. They decided that he was a liability when they got ambushed by Aztech after someone saw the pixie and considering there were approximately 6 shadow running pixies in the world. It was pretty easy to figure out who was operating in that area. After they worked their debt off from Aztech. They decided on their own to never allow anything but the base 5 races in the team.

As for the other 2 I flat banned Otaku and AI because they are unbalanced.

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

We all know that stereotypes exist for a reason, and of course we're not going to seriously apply them to people we know well and have played with before. But after helping with probably close to 50 demo/public games in the past 13 years (plus a fair few one-shots/short campaigns online), I know damn well that if I get a new player and he's coming in with a "quirky" Tabaxi rogue or a Kobold sorcerer, I should probably expect some idiocy. Would I ban him from my table outright just because he wanted to play something that I know is statistically associated with dumb shit or drama? Of course not, that's like banning perfectly reasonable black players because their fellow melanin-Americans have a habit of stealing shit. But at least the guy being stupid won't come as a surprise, and I won't feel bad at all voting to kick him if he is a jackass and, most importantly, unwilling to learn or change his ways for the better.

Yeah, this is more-or-less what I was thinking, originally; sorry if I wasn't clear enough. Way I see it, personally; a good enough player can make any kind of character work well enough, so long as their smart about it. There are reasons why some races or builds are stereotyped the way that they are; it's all about how the players run the characters, not the character themselves.

I had a table that had a Pixie and they were using the inherent stealth to disable and hack doors and cameras. They decided that he was a liability when they got ambushed by Aztech after someone saw the pixie and considering there were approximately 6 shadow running pixies in the world. It was pretty easy to figure out who was operating in that area. After they worked their debt off from Aztech. They decided on their own to never allow anything but the base 5 races in the team.

Any other stories like this? It's kinda fun, reading about people getting a wake-up call like this.

As for the other 2 I flat banned Otaku and AI because they are unbalanced.

Any other specifics for other races? Or is it just because they're uncommon by comparison? Call me curious.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

I had a table that had a Pixie and they were using the inherent stealth to disable and hack doors and cameras. They decided that he was a liability when they got ambushed by Aztech after someone saw the pixie and considering there were approximately 6 shadow running pixies in the world. It was pretty easy to figure out who was operating in that area. After they worked their debt off from Aztech. They decided on their own to never allow anything but the base 5 races in the team.

Of course, the easy, intelligent way around this problem is to simply not broadcast the fact that you have a pixie working on your team, so you can benefit from having the pixie without risking backlash.

 

[Ghostse]

Would I ban him from my table outright just because he wanted to play something that I know is statistically associated with dumb shit or drama?

There's things I'm going to list right out the gate as banned for games I run.
Stuff like bringing me a tabaxi for an open game I'm not going to turn the player away just for that, I 'm going to look at the rest of their character and if something else about their character or the person doesn't pass the sniff test (sometimes literally) I'm going tell them "No" because I don't think either he or I will enjoy ourselves.

i.e.
"Tabaxi Rogue Mittens, chaotic neutral. Mittens likes things that shiny, and doesn't understand the concept of money or ownership - If he sees it, mittens wants it. Mittens is also easily distracted and often winds up in trouble" REJECTED

"Tabaxi Rogue Leon, chaotic good. Leon believes that laws that don't benefit the good of the people should be repealed. But he has a taste for the finer things in life, and will never pass up a chance for treasure." APPROVED

And if a player I know and trust approaches me and says "I know you hate X, but I want to play X" I'll probably say yes if they bring me something interesting, and will get a lot more latitude.

Hobgoblin Fighter

Hobgoblin is probably the the only goblinoid I'd let in. They aren't mechanically broken and are Lawful. But I'd want a concept to sell it, and they're going to need to accept that they're going be viewed - at best - with distrust.

 

[Flaming Insignias]

It's been mentioned obliquely, but anyone who wants to play chaotic neutral or the equivalent thereof. What they're inevitably wanting is to be some lolrandom "funny badass" like Deadpool or Rick Sanchez. In practice, this usually results in them pissing off everyone else at the table when they decide to do something stupid or dickish at a critical moment and fuck things up for the party because "lOL I'm jUSt sO rAnDOM YoU guISe!!!1!"

This has always annoyed me about chaotic neutral figures. Even Wizards has been forced to say that "chaotic doesn't mean batshit crazy," but the damage was done and you can expect CN to be a glorified Deadpool Quinn type character more concerned with being "funny and wacky" instead of having any clear purpose. I wouldn't mind if people playing Chaotic Neutral were taking the alignment more like Jack Sparrow or Han Solo pre-character development (I've done it in the past myself), but it just doesn't happen and that pisses me off. It's always either "balanced books" neutral who thinks that you can rectify your evil actions by doing some vaguely nice things, or "random" chaotic who thinks that their duty is to scoff at every law and social norm they see simply because of a twisted sense of anarchism.

Yeah, this is more-or-less what I was thinking, originally; sorry if I wasn't clear enough. Way I see it, personally; a good enough player can make any kind of character work well enough, so long as their smart about it. There are reasons why some races or builds are stereotyped the way that they are; it's all about how the players run the characters, not the character themselves.

I like to believe that races and characters are not innately awful since I had rather fun games with people playing all sorts of beastfolk, but it's still a red flag since you often get people wanting to add furries where they don't belong and thus it is probably best to make blanket bans rather than run the risk of getting sparkledogs. Freakshit is real, and people should be wary of it.

 

[Corn Flakes]

There's things I'm going to list right out the gate as banned for games I run.
Stuff like bringing me a tabaxi for an open game I'm not going to turn the player away just for that, I 'm going to look at the rest of their character and if something else about their character or the person doesn't pass the sniff test (sometimes literally) I'm going tell them "No" because I don't think either he or I will enjoy ourselves.

(Emphasis mine.)

That's actually a very good point that often gets ignored in these discussions; the GM is a player too. Hell, it is his (or, as unlikely as it may be, her) game. If the GM for whatever reason doesn't like a race, class, or concept and thinks having one of them in his game is going to make things not fun for him, it's his prerogative to restrict it or ban it outright. And it doesn't even have to be about personal tastes, it can simply be a matter of character concepts conflicting with the game itself. If you're running a more low-tech, more grounded Tolkienesque campaign, or maybe a samurai group in Legend of the Five Rings, there's just no space there for a catgirl artificer wearing a chainmail bikini and riding her steampunk golem around.

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

Hobgoblin is probably the the only goblinoid I'd let in. They aren't mechanically broken and are Lawful. But I'd want a concept to sell it, and they're going to need to accept that they're going be viewed - at best - with distrust.

It was an evil campaign and most of his time was spent tard wrangling the neutral/chaotic chaotics. And when I play a freakshit character I go in expecting levels of distrust and hostility and I never make a character that clashes with the campaign/party theme. I tend to care less about player choices in what species they play and more about whether or not their character has a motivation or goals rather than just being a pile of stats and no personality/drive for adventure.

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

I've built PCs that 'go against the grain', but they're specifically designed to (a) work WITH the group, and (b) not suck.

That first bit is the part that irritates me the most, and I suspect it's why 'speshul snowflake' PCs get such a shit reputation. Because for the most part, people who play them seem incapable of working with the party.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

I love reading what everyone's red flags are because most of the characters I make fall into those categories. In my current group I've done the following:
Hobgoblin Fighter
Tabaxi Hexblade
Tabaxi Monk
Tiefling Sorcerer
Fairy Paladin
Lizardman Ranger
Risen (aka Frankenstein) Fighter
Minotaur Fighter
Female High Elf Paladin
Female High Elf Wizard
Female Aasimar Warlock
Kobold Thief
Bugbear Cleric

The Fairy Paladin sounds interesting. What game and system did you play that one in?

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

The Fairy Paladin sounds interesting. What game and system did you play that one in?

5e playtest material at the time. It was a paladin of conquest and quite fun until it was eaten by a dragon.

 

[robobobo]

Yeah, being insanely easy to identify is very bad in Shadowrun. For someone basically human shaped you could get away with a solid disguise, full body armor, etc, but there's no way to not be noticed if you're a shifter or otherwise really weird-shaped. Team in the game I'm running just hit a high enough amount of reputation that some of their old targets are coming after them as they aren't nobodies anymore. If someone's playing a fucking centaur or something, there's just no way they can ever lay low.

 

[Scream Aim Fire]

Yeah, being insanely easy to identify is very bad in Shadowrun. For someone basically human shaped you could get away with a solid disguise, full body armor, etc, but there's no way to not be noticed if you're a shifter or otherwise really weird-shaped. Team in the game I'm running just hit a high enough amount of reputation that some of their old targets are coming after them as they aren't nobodies anymore. If someone's playing a fucking centaur or something, there's just no way they can ever lay low.

Like I asked on another board; it begs the question as to why there are even any other races available for playing. Yeah, there's plenty of options for player characters... but if you're going to be actively gimping yourself and your group by playing most of them, then why would you ever consider them in the first place? Seriously, with how important being anonymous is in SR, picking anything other than the core races is something of a bad call; yeah, you might have a unique appearance, but the moment you end up spotted, it's over.

I mean, you could come up with some really interesting stories for characters; one guy I saw had a Changeling character that was forcibly transformed into a freak and had to take up whatever jobs he could in an effort to make ends meet - i.e., he was forced into it, as opposed to voluntarily becoming a freak like the average furry. Still... the restrictions and difficulties that are attached to most player options - looking directly at you, Drakes - means that, aside from a bit of roleplaying value, there's really no reason to play anything other than the basic races.

 

[Penne Dreadful]

it begs the question as to why there are even any other races available for playing

Because you, the publisher, need to keep selling splatbooks, and you wrote up the relevant races in the core. It's a general problem with scope and design creep across a lot of systems, and there's always an audience of minmaxers and problem players eager to buy up anything that lets them play an ever-more-special character.

To add a little more to that thought, there are two main ways for most RPGs to monetise their existing player bases: splats for players, and modules for GMs. I dislike the latter on a philosophical level, while the former are just often bad in practise.

 

[Ghostse]

Like I asked on another board; it begs the question as to why there are even any other races available for playing.

A lot of times it is more for GMs to build out NPCs or for players who have played literally everything else.

WMPRPG 4e has monster race builds, but they are very clearly second-class citizens. They not only get fucked out of racial feats and paragon paths, but mechanically they have fewer options.

 

[Flexo]

In general, just being a race that isn't human/elf/dwarf without providing a compelling character archetype they want to play that justifies it.

This kind of calls back to the wheelchair discussion. ("If you're in a wheelchair all the time in life, why not imagine being able to walk?")

If you're stuck as a human in your meatbag life all the time, why bother pretending to just be more of the same? Why not the chance to imagine being something you are not? Isn't that the point of the game? (not that I, being a robot, am capable of imagination)

 

[Second Missing Primarch]

This kind of calls back to the wheelchair discussion. ("If you're in a wheelchair all the time in life, why not imagine being able to walk?")

If you're stuck as a human in your meatbag life all the time, why bother pretending to just be more of the same? Why not the chance to imagine being something you are not? Isn't that the point of the game? (not that I, being a robot, am capable of imagination)

That's the reason I often roll nonhuman characters myself, both in tabletop and vidya. It's a fun storytelling challenge to stop and ask myself "okay, so how would a tiefling react in this situation? How will they interact with the world around them? Do I try to play nice, or do I just assume that everyone else is gonna be an asshole to me because I'm a tiefling and respond accordingly? Or do I just not bother trying to interact with people and let the party do the talking while I lurk in the background and look menacing?"

If you do it right, it really adds a lot of flavor to the experience. If you do it wrong, you're That Guy and everyone's gonna hate you. It's a fine line to walk and it's not surprising that people often wind up on the wrong side.