I just want the world to save me.





disappointed it took this long.

I'm interested in playing an interesting character in an interesting world with their own hopes, dreams and ambitions and don't really want to be saddled with the chore of saving the world being the main thing we do in the game. I'm also not particularly interested in being a "hero" either.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;577362I just want the world to save me.





disappointed it took this long.

*throws rotten tomatoes*

Quote from: Skywalker;576956I am currently in a phase of gameplay where "I want to destroy the World whilst saving it." More real world mythically bent than modern heroic fantasy. Not sure if that counts though

On discussing the concept of Asura in Tenra Bansho Zero, which wandering blade described very articulately RPGnet here: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?641916-Kickstarter-Tenra-Bansho-Zero-is-live!&p=15835550#post15835550, it made me realise that this is what I want from my fantasy RPGs these days, and what I was trying to say above. To steal Harvey Dent's quote (thanks to wandering blade) I want my fantasy RPGs to be about PCs who either die as hero or live long enough to become a tyrants.

I don't really care too much for stories that are either "save the world" or "not save the world". I much prefer the personal arc of the hero who struggles with their own issues. If the world in peril and in need of saving helps emphasise that, then that is all good.

Keep going, I'm sure you'll all get over being such jaded cunts.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;577900Keep going, I'm sure you'll all get over being such jaded cunts.

RPGPundit

The hell you say. I've saved the world enough already and now it's someone else's turn.

Been there, done that, got the XP and leveled up. It was Epic. :cool:

Quote from: RPGPundit;577900Keep going, I'm sure you'll all get over being such jaded cunts.

RPGPundit

Lol.
or this is what happened to us after gaming for 3 decades plus.

Another vote for nuanced. I need a local context and things for my character to care about first. That way when things eventually get to the global scale (if they ever do) saving the world actually means something. Because then it means saving those people my character cares about, not just a bunch of undifferentiated strangers.

Also agree that doing it every other week rapidly loses its impact. Saving the world should be an end-of-game or very occasional thing. It's one of the reasons the default Solar premise of Exalted just doesn't work for me. Everything having to be Creation-threatening all the time just gets boring.

Quote from: RPGPundit;577900Keep going, I'm sure you'll all get over being such jaded cunts.

By Jove, this. Saving the world got old? Really?

Then again, as a GM, I was never one for the "save the world" plots (unless saving a planet or a star system from some threat, in a huge expansive SF setting, counts). I usually save those for the high-level games, of which I haven't really run or played a lot.

I just want to play a competent character that is trying to survive one day to the next.

Quote from: The Butcher;578139By Jove, this. Saving the world got old? Really?

Then again, as a GM, I was never one for the "save the world" plots (unless saving a planet or a star system from some threat, in a huge expansive SF setting, counts). I usually save those for the high-level games, of which I haven't really run or played a lot.

Sometimes it gets old, or sometimes it's just a tough act to follow. I've seen it go either way. One D&D campaign I played in had a GM who couldn't seem to come up with anything else. The world's in peril again? Has it been a week already? The players (myself included) politely asked him to take it down a notch, which he did, and we continued playing.

OTOH, the proverbial "best game ever" (You can ask any of the players, they'll tell you!) with my old gaming group featured such an awesome "save the world" finale, nothing's ever gonna top that for me, either as a player or a GM.

Quote from: jeff37923;576923I was talking to my Labyrinth Lord group and this came up. The Player who has the most experience said that he was tired of playing adventures where they were cast as Big Damn Heroes. He didn't want to be saving the world every week, he just wanted a chance to play the game for the sake of playing the game. I'm taking this as he wants to immerse himself in a fantasy environment, so am working to accomodate him and the rest of the group.

Has anyone else run into this? Have you had Players who were tired of Saving the World?

I've never run into it because I've always known better than to use that kind of scenario on a regular basis. I realized at a young age that the Bond films started to become a farce when they went to this well a few times too often. I loved Thunderball, but overall the best Bond films were the ones where yes, it would really suck if Bond failed, but the world wouldn't be destroyed/plunged into darkness.

Quote from: Imp;577052Been tired of "saving the world" for, like, at least 20 years or so.

Yep.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;577105I created a science fiction setting in which it's too late to save the world -- it's already been destroyed.

Basically I felt the need to ask, what do you really want to save?

Saving the world is a no-brainer. But give people a chance to fight for one thing they believe in, and things get interesting....

My own campaign takes place in a Dark Ages-type of setting, where the Empire fell and people try to survive in this new world. It's not post-apocalyptic (no nuclear holocaust or anything), but people are trying to carve out a place for themselves among the ruins of the lost civilization.

This dovetails nicely with one of the assumed goals on 1E/OD&D: advancing to high enough level to assemble a band of followers and establish a domain for themselves. In a post Fall of Rome/Dark Age setting, a few score or a few hundred men could make a man king.

Quote from: Dimitrios;577195The title of this thread describes my gaming preferences pretty well.

Most of the time I'd rather emulate Fafhard and the Grey Mouser than Aragorn and Frodo.

Our model was somewhere between The Professionals and The Wild Bunch.

QuoteI also am a fan of city based campaigns, which tend to focus more on local conflicts than universe threatening catastrophes.

It allows for more intrigue. I ran a mini-campaign that took place in an quasi-Italian city-state where nobles had armed gangs of retainers, assassins, etc and carried on campaigns of tit-for-tat violence (if a faction was seen as going too far -outright warfare/rioting in the streets- the other factions and the Prince would gang up and destroy that faction), spying, theft, intrigue -some of which led to more traditional scenarios as a faction might (for example) try to find lost treasure in a faraway tomb to hire more muscle, pay bribes, etc.

Quote from: The Butcher;578139By Jove, this. Saving the world got old? Really?

Anything gets old if it's done too often.

Quote from: The Butcher;578139By Jove, this. Saving the world got old? Really?

It's related to the saying that when everyone is special, nobody is.  When ever adventure involves saving the world, it becomes routine rather than special.

Quote from: John Morrow;578860It's related to the saying that when everyone is special, nobody is.  When ever adventure involves saving the world, it becomes routine rather than special.

I think only if the world is being saved in the same way every time.

RPGPundit