TheRPGSite

This came up in another thread.

Quote from: daniel_ream;910005It's been my experience that whatever people do for their day job, they want the exact opposite at the gaming table.

I'm a teacher at an English as a second language school. I teach two three-hour classes per day, each with 15 international students in it. The students cycle through VERY quickly, most of them staying for between 2 to 4 weeks. I've been doing this since 2009, so I have interacted in depth with an enormous number of people from all over the world, more than many humans will in a lifetime.

When Daniel made the observation above it gave me pause. I've long wanted to run more down to earth, character focused games, especially historical or pseudo-historical stuff, but when push comes to shove I eventually find myself injecting gimmicks, special snowflake NPCs, surreal landscapes and inhuman monsters into everything. My most recent attempts  at pseudo-history with 7th Sea 1st ed (two separate campaigns) petered out partly because I got frustrated with the rules but also because I was struggling to maintain focus on low key character struggles instead of supernatural cataclysms and magi-tech shenanigans.

Maybe after a long day of dealing with every sort of real person earth has to offer and their mundane issues in a cramped room, my heart uncontrollably yearns for giant mushroom forests filled with amoral face-collecting worm-blimps and nary a decent family drama in sight.

Or maybe my problem is something different.

Anyway, TL;DR - What is your day job and do you want the opposite in tabletop?

Attorney for a domestic violence center, and while a) the last thing I'd want to do is deal with domestic violence or child abuse in a game, b) if you set up a game where all I do is punch wifebeating orcs in the face, I could probably play it all day for catharsis.

I disagree, politely.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]267[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Christopher Brady;910027I disagree, politely.

Not only politely, but also amusingly. :cool:

Educator with 20 years in the system. The last thing I want is a lot of paperwork and details. So, the game is light, fast and loose. Maybe Ream is onto something...

How did the knowledge of this truism ever get lost?  That's what roleplaying is about - not being you.  Even a doctor who is playing a healer is probably going to want to have things be different, have their character do things they cannot.  Your entire life you're you - except when you're roleplaying.  When games are just you, doing something else, like engaging in collaborative storytelling, or engaging in a tactical miniatures game, then by definition, being you doing those things, you're playing a tabletop game, but you're not really roleplaying are you?

Another; it depends completely upon the individual person.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910039How did the knowledge of this truism ever get lost?  That's what roleplaying is about - not being you.  Even a doctor who is playing a healer is probably going to want to have things be different, have their character do things they cannot.  Your entire life you're you - except when you're roleplaying.  When games are just you, doing something else, like engaging in collaborative storytelling, or engaging in a tactical miniatures game, then by definition, being you doing those things, you're playing a tabletop game, but you're not really roleplaying are you?

sure, sure.  unfortunately collaborative storytelling is roleplaying.

Physician here. I often play the cleric. And I've played my share of physicians in modern-day and SF games, though I wouldn't say it's a pattern. They are every bit characters — as in, different people than myself — as the barbarians, wizards, starfighter pilots or police detectives.

The issue of "what flavor of escapism people want/look for in RPGs" is so nuanced that I have a hard time identifying patterns even in people I've games with for years. Sure, there are easy ones — the stutterer who plays socially-oriented characters, the engineer who does MMA and plays maxed-out combat monsters — but they seem to be the exception, at least in my experience. But the interaction between everyday frustrations, self-image and preferred playstyles is so unpredictable that I find any attempt at analysis that's not informed by frequent, regular play, so unreliable as to be mostly worthless.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910039How did the knowledge of this truism ever get lost? That's what roleplaying is about - not being you. Even a doctor who is playing a healer is probably going to want to have things be different, have their character do things they cannot.  Your entire life you're you - except when you're roleplaying.  When games are just you, doing something else, like engaging in collaborative storytelling, or engaging in a tactical miniatures game, then by definition, being you doing those things, you're playing a tabletop game, but you're not really roleplaying are you?

This is obviously true, of course. From a style perspective, however, Ream is saying (I think) that the wants, desires and execution of your RP experience is "exactly opposite." Of course, this leads me to consider the idea that the game is just an extension of the person, especially in cases where you have the player expressing something of what they do IRL. For example, one of my steady players of days gone by works in special education. Always plays a healer in the fantasy game. My wife, on the other hand, has a job with wide-ranging responsibilities, to include being the face of her organization, which requires being in constant diplomatic mode. NONE of her characters ever bother being diplomatic. Another, current player is the logical, thoughtful, problem-solving type. He's always a spellcaster, and tends to design his PCs with the ability to address -- ta dah! -- problems. When I do get to play, I lean toward characters that are simple, mechanically, but, by and large charismatic in some way. As a teacher, my job is to simplify concepts in order to facilitate acquisition by the audience. So, I assume there's some argument to be made that Vlad the charismatic fighter is just an extension of how I see my role.

As for what I want from the game, though? I prefer not getting bogged down in details, minutiae, which just happens to be the aspect of my job I find less than scintillating.  

Anyhoo, it's an interesting point to consider, and I have just wasted an inordinate amount of time on it.  I'm think I'm gonna go roll up a fiddly-ass, feat-infested, introverted sorcerer.:-)

A lot of the people who taught martial arts I've gamed with, played characters who were martial. A lot of professors I've gamed with play scholarly wizards. A lot of musicians I played with, play bards. I think if you have an interest in something it often comes out in the kind of character you play and the games you are drawn to. Not always though. Some people do want to get away from daily stresses as well. I think a lot of jobs involve everyday things that you wouldn't want to make the center of a campaign (or you'd rarely do so). But I don't think that is because people are avoiding what it is they do for a living. I could easily see someone who is a lawyer for example, playing a lawyer PC because they'd feel pretty comfortable with all the details of playing such a character.

Quote from: Sommerjon;910042unfortunately collaborative storytelling is roleplaying.

Unfortunately, stating a falsehood doesn't make it a truth. :D

History professor. Players come to me, naturally I guess, asking me to run historical-style games and to immerse in medieval history through gaming. That's fine, but I vastly prefer pulpy Swords and Sorcery! Conan, Elric, and Kane style masculine, and somewhat adolescent, existential fantasy of courage and swords against an uncaring universe (or Frazetta-verse).

CRKruger is right, in my book.  The point of role playing is escapism by immersion into a character and/or a world that is outside and beyond that of day to day experiences.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;910052A lot of the people who taught martial arts I've gamed with, played characters who were martial. A lot of professors I've gamed with play scholarly wizards. A lot of musicians I played with, play bards. I think if you have an interest in something it often comes out in the kind of character you play and the games you are drawn to. Not always though. Some people do want to get away from daily stresses as well. I think a lot of jobs involve everyday things that you wouldn't want to make the center of a campaign (or you'd rarely do so). But I don't think that is because people are avoiding what it is they do for a living. I could easily see someone who is a lawyer for example, playing a lawyer PC because they'd feel pretty comfortable with all the details of playing such a character.

True, you feel comfortable with what you know, but even if someone is "playing to type", a lot of time it's different.  The policeman who wants the freedom of a western sheriff, the healer who wants to help others without interference, the religious believer whose god is actually manifest and objectively real, the IT guy who plays the chaotic hacker, the MMA guy might have a wife, 3 kids and a mortgage - his barbarian is all about the Ale and Whores, etc. etc.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;910022Anyway, TL;DR - What is your day job and do you want the opposite in tabletop?

I'm in the media, and my job includes writing about down to Earth stuff, a lot of which is dark:).
And while I do play Exalted, I prefer historical or at least down to Earth games for most of my campaigns. In fact, when I started playing, I'd have laughed in your face if you suggested a high-power, high-magic, escapist setting.
I also practice historical fencing, and most of my characters are martially-inclined, though the styles vary, as well as their reasons for fighting.
So no, for my money, that statement is wrong;).

It just so happens that I discuss Exalted the most, because it provokes strong feelings on some forums:D.

Like most vague and generalized statements, there will be some folks who fit the statement perfectly and others who are the exact opposite. I'm a teacher and a physicist and I enjoy realistic RPGs as well as cinematic. I like some with heavy rules, others with light rules. I'm not sure a single statement will fit any of us all of the time.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910056Unfortunately, stating a falsehood doesn't make it a truth. :D

S'okay. I didn't state a falsehood.

S'okay. That time again for a while. We understand.

QuoteThe point of role playing is escapism by immersion into a character and/or a world that is outside and beyond that of day to day experiences.

This passes the truthiness test.  I'm confined (mostly) to a wheelchair, and so I like driving fast and roleplaying agile, running, wire-fu-action characters!

And I naturally dislike slow drivers in the passing lane.  :cool:

I have a negative innate musical ability. I have noticed that I often play characters with skills or abilities based on music.

I tend to GM more than I play. I suppose playing the role of an Omnipotent Deity is about as far from me as I can get ;)

The point of roleplaying is to have fun with friends.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910039How did the knowledge of this truism ever get lost?  That's what roleplaying is about - not being you.  Even a doctor who is playing a healer is probably going to want to have things be different, have their character do things they cannot.  Your entire life you're you - except when you're roleplaying.  When games are just you, doing something else, like engaging in collaborative storytelling, or engaging in a tactical miniatures game, then by definition, being you doing those things, you're playing a tabletop game, but you're not really roleplaying are you?

Roleplaying is about playing a role. That role may greatly resemble you, or it may be very different. No matter what, it will be a role, because it can only be so accurate. I can make a character based on myself, statting myself with a subjective opinion of my skills, which will create one possible layer of distortion. Then add in the fact that I really can't be sure how I would act when confronted with the fantastical situations in the game. I'm likely to end up with an idealized version of myself that is only somewhat more accurate to who I am than if I were to play an elf.

This notion is either blindingly obvious or "mu."  Few of us have exciting lives, so no shit our games will be different from our real lives.

On the other hand, I work as a newspaper reporter.  Playing D&D means ipso facto I will be playing not-what-I-do-in-real-life.

230 pound muay thai loving law student who moonlights as a research contractor for Legal Service Corporations handling complex consumer finance cases no one else is willing to take. I tend to play stocky hand to hand fighters who are chomping at the bit to take on large banks. I kind of suck at the whole "don't play yourself" bit in roleplaying, as in just about every RPG or computer game I tend to be a stocky diplomat type who always tries to go for the most morally good option. One of the many reasons why I failed so badly at RPing in VTM.

EOD tech here and I rarely play. When I have, I never played an ordnance guy or made IEDs or the like. I'm not the "Blow shits up!!!" guy, no matter the setting. Come to think of it, my NPCs are rarely into boom-boom, either.

My super-bestie was a corpsman and he's the same way, but with being the "healer". Even clerics, who he promptly slaps for praying to sky-faeries and touching him with warm, glowy hands.

OK, he doesn't slap clerics but he wants to. I know he wants to...

Personally, I dream of being a cyber-ninja with mind-wammy powers, so that's what I play. :D

Quote from: CRKrueger;910083S'okay. That time again for a while. We understand.

Glad you agree that I didn't make a falsehood.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910059True, you feel comfortable with what you know, but even if someone is "playing to type", a lot of time it's different.  The policeman who wants the freedom of a western sheriff, the healer who wants to help others without interference, the religious believer whose god is actually manifest and objectively real, the IT guy who plays the chaotic hacker, the MMA guy might have a wife, 3 kids and a mortgage - his barbarian is all about the Ale and Whores, etc. etc.

All I am saying is the premise 'people want to role play the exact opposite of what they do for a living, seems a little shaky to me. I think a lot of peoples' character choices are not far off from their real life personality. I am not saying it is identical to daily life or as boring.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;910136All I am saying is the premise 'people want to role play the exact opposite of what they do for a living, seems a little shaky to me. I think a lot of peoples' character choices are not far off from their real life personality. I am not saying it is identical to daily life or as boring.

In a weird way, I've found that the best PCs are like the best wrestling characters, it's the performer's real self turned up to 20.

Quote from: IskandarKebab;910146In a weird way, I've found that the best PCs are like the best wrestling characters, it's the performer's real self turned up to 20.

Yeah, exactly, my stock RPG character that I always fall back on when I can't think of anything else is a well-meaning oblivious dumbass. I'm a bit of the absent-minded professor in person but that character is just that with all of the brakes thrown out and then built to be hard to kill. Many of my other most successful characters have been like that but more dickish (shading either towards Zap Brannigan or Invader Zim or both).

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;910052A lot of the people who taught martial arts I've gamed with, played characters who were martial. A lot of professors I've gamed with play scholarly wizards. A lot of musicians I played with, play bards. I think if you have an interest in something it often comes out in the kind of character you play and the games you are drawn to. Not always though. Some people do want to get away from daily stresses as well. I think a lot of jobs involve everyday things that you wouldn't want to make the center of a campaign (or you'd rarely do so). But I don't think that is because people are avoiding what it is they do for a living. I could easily see someone who is a lawyer for example, playing a lawyer PC because they'd feel pretty comfortable with all the details of playing such a character.

I knew a player whos work job was crawling through tunnels and exterminating rats and things. His characters in the sessions I played with him in were all effectively vermin exterminators and all you had to do was have an NPC mention "rat" and off his character would go to commit vermincide. And like you I knew two martial arts practitioners who played martial arts characters whenever they could.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;910022Anyway, TL;DR - What is your day job and do you want the opposite in tabletop?

I work for a Fortune 500 company as a Quality Control Robot Operator. I like playing in science fiction/science fantasy genre as a pilot/mechanic of some kind, so not too far from what I do normally.

Quote from: jeff37923;910152I work for a Fortune 500 company as a Quality Control Robot Operator. I like playing in science fiction/science fantasy genre as a pilot/mechanic of some kind, so not too far from what I do normally.

Aside from the whole going into space which you will never do in your lifetime thing. :D

Landscape architect, and I want beautifully-executed maps and table-top terrain in my games, thank you very much. I guess it matters whether you hate your job.

This is exactly why I hate playing murder hobos.

Because it's too close to your day job?

The correct response is simply "lol". (Or you could note that you found the post to be helpful, for more of an understated effect.)

Responding to a joke with a joke isn't an appropriate response?  Do you have the special secret interface that put the "Do you find this post helpful?" back in, because I don't see it. ;)

There aren't many games with being a corporate drone as a focus, so I guess I'm safe.

I work in Surveillance, so any game where I'm not sitting and watching a video screen or monitor is a good game. Yay for human interaction!!

Villains & Vigilanties has players create game versions of themselves. Probably a few others that do too.

I'm a big data crunching health care researcher, so unless they invent SQL: the RPG or Legal Compliance D20, there won't be an exact analogue. On the other hand, I deal with an impossibly large system where incomplete data informs large questions about complex interactions that are half factual, and half rely on human behavior, with lots of imperfect systems (many of them legacy) which are still important to people even though they don't work perfectly for the situation at hand. So what do I do for escapism? Roll dice with a group that still considers 3e a perfectly good system and 'we'll make it work' covers a lot of the issues with the system. So maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;910105This notion is either blindingly obvious or "mu."  Few of us have exciting lives, so no shit our games will be different from our real lives.

On the other hand, I work as a newspaper reporter.  Playing D&D means ipso facto I will be playing not-what-I-do-in-real-life.

I'm the district manager of the local paper, but I don't think that would work in a game. Maybe CoC.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;910114EOD tech here and I rarely play. When I have, I never played an ordnance guy or made IEDs or the like. I'm not the "Blow shits up!!!" guy, no matter the setting. Come to think of it, my NPCs are rarely into boom-boom, either.

My super-bestie was a corpsman and he's the same way, but with being the "healer". Even clerics, who he promptly slaps for praying to sky-faeries and touching him with warm, glowy hands.

OK, he doesn't slap clerics but he wants to. I know he wants to...

Personally, I dream of being a cyber-ninja with mind-wammy powers, so that's what I play. :D

As the bestie in question, I did three tours. Suggesting that I play the healer Will get you slapped. Repeatedly.

That said, most of my characters tend to be alcoholics, and I've been on the wagon nominally for years, so there's that I suppose.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;910136All I am saying is the premise 'people want to role play the exact opposite of what they do for a living, seems a little shaky to me. I think a lot of peoples' character choices are not far off from their real life personality. I am not saying it is identical to daily life or as boring.

It is shaky.

Some do, big deal.  Some isn't all.

Quote from: Batman;910199I work in Surveillance, so any game where I'm not sitting and watching a video screen or monitor is a good game. Yay for human interaction!!

Would you believe I sometimes, sometimes envy a job like yours?

I am a polychromatic spaceship from the zone of fantasy. My day job involves shooting polychromatic aliens for fun and profit. (No, really, they turn into coins and cash bills that I have to fly down and collect. It's a bit rough on the wings.)

I have played just about anything and everything, but usually let random processes decide for me.

I have a fondness for GMing the human everyday, such as bookkeeping, housecleaning, receptioning, shopping, accounting, cooking, filing forms in triplicate, driving in traffic, and writing reports/essays.

So I guess it's true! :p

Quote from: Warboss Squee;910229I'm the district manager of the local paper, but I don't think that would work in a game. Maybe CoC.

I seem to recall both Marvel and DC comics having a heck of a lot of characters with day jobs in the newspaper industry. You could play a superhero game. :D

Quote from: Warboss Squee;910229That said, most of my characters tend to be alcoholics, and I've been on the wagon nominally for years, so there's that I suppose.

Interesting. I'm twelve years sober. I don't make my characters have the same issues, and a if we did the traditional 'you all meet in a tavern,' I assume my character would be having an ale. However, I wouldn't imagine choosing to roleplay an active drinking alcoholic.

The only way in which this has been true in my experience is that I used to like playing clerics, sometimes Paladins, despite not being religious myself. Although part of the reason why is because I thought they were way more awesome in terms of their game functions than people gave them credit for. Since few people wanted to play them, I was more than happy do.

I've had a lot of different jobs. When I was a factory worker, I kept imagining how awesome a factory would be as the backdrop for an encounter in the Dark Conspiracy RPG. When I was a day-trader, I really wanted to play a merchant in an exploration & commerce style campaign in a fantasy RPG. In highschool, I was a player in 3 fairly long AD&D campaigns, in one I played a Paladin, one I played a Fighter, and one I played a Bard. My passions at the time? Playing guitar and the school wrestling team. That explains the fighter and the bard. The Paladin I've already explained earlier. Now I am a manager in a sales & marketing office, and I want to play a Rogue who is a social beast.

It seems the pattern for me is I want to play characters whose professions and skill sets are actually a really good fit for my real job, but whose morality and beliefs differ greatly from my own.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;910229I'm the district manager of the local paper, but I don't think that would work in a game. Maybe CoC.

I'm a murderhobo in real life, so that's not too hard to work into most games.

To refine the thesis of the thread, I think it's that people don't want to deal with the same bullshit in a game that they do in real life. Maybe that involves doing another job, but it just might mean doing their job as they wish it was,

I think it's implied that the reference is to people who have boring/mundane jobs. If you make a living bagging groceries, I doubt that's what you'd want to do in a game.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910275I think it's implied that the reference is to people who have boring/mundane jobs. If you make a living bagging groceries, I doubt that's what you'd want to do in a game.

I don't know...is "groceries" slang for treasure I stole from the beings I just stabbed. 'Cuz a lot of D&D players like bagging those kind of groceries.

Quote from: CRKrueger;910156Aside from the whole going into space which you will never do in your lifetime thing. :D

For that, I have Traveller, d6 Star Wars, Mekton, Jovian Chronicles, Cyberpunk 2020......

:D

Quote from: Omega;910205Villains & Vigilanties has players create game versions of themselves. Probably a few others that do too.

Timelords by BTRC does that. The main problem from it occurs during character creation when people learn that the rest of the group doesn't think they have high intelligence or Charisma*. Heh.

*Stat names may be wrong. It's been a few years since I looked at the game.

Back to the original question, I own a school where I teach after school English classes in Korean.

My characters never seem to be very well-educated or care about knowledge, my most common kind of character is dex-focused infantry (swashbucklers, lots of skill points in acrobatics, that sort of thing), but the actual personality is my own turned up to 20 for a lot of the most fun characters.

Forgot to add: none of my PCs knees hurt when they go down the stairs. (Guess I DO want the exact opposite):-)

I work in the department of corrections. I don't ever play characters associated with that (I'm typically GM so I don't play much) My characters tend to be very social "fight the man" rogues and revolutionarys.

Brujah has always been my favorite Vampire clan,for example.

I do posses a Sociology and Psychology degree though, and I only recently became "the man" because fighting the man doesn't pay the bills.

Quote from: Orphan81;910322I only recently became "the man" because fighting the man doesn't pay the bills.

Not trying to ridicule you here, but this statement is one of life's truisms.

Quote from: jeff37923;910324Not trying to ridicule you here, but this statement is one of life's truisms.

Word. Not living in abject poverty and being able to pay my bills is worth selling out.

That or yaknow, I finally grew up and realized I could still help people while being a productive member of society.

I allways play a handicapped person.

Quote from: Jason Coplen;910288Timelords by BTRC does that. The main problem from it occurs during character creation when people learn that the rest of the group doesn't think they have high intelligence or Charisma*. Heh.

*Stat names may be wrong. It's been a few years since I looked at the game.

Good old Timelords, love that game.  At least they had some sort of objective method (various tests, etc.) to come up with a person's stats in the 1st and 2nd editions of the game.  No idea on the 3rd edition, don't have it.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;910242Would you believe I sometimes, sometimes envy a job like yours?

Oh it's an interesting job sometimes, because I work at a Casino it's fun to watch people be completed disturbed fucks, but its also sad too. To watch someone blow $60,000 in 2 hands of Blackjack and shrug it off and laugh.....like damn.

Quote from: Omega;910348I allways play a handicapped person.

I have a Superhero/Crimefighter type who is actually deaf.  This is in homage to a friend who is an ASL.

Electrical engineer and work for a big corporation where I have to wear a suit everyday. It's true. My friends and I basically want to sit around the table being heroes and not deal with any real life bullshit (so relationships are out from our game).

Quote from: Omega;910348I allways play a handicapped person.

I tried real hard to stat up a blind swordsman in Gurps; patterned after Rutger Hauer in Blind Fury, because I didn't know about Zatoichi. That was hard to get right without a gazillion points.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910419I tried real hard to stat up a blind swordsman in Gurps; patterned after Rutger Hauer in Blind Fury, because I didn't know about Zatoichi. That was hard to get right without a gazillion points.

Blind no more usefully describes those sorts of characters than it does Daredevil.

You would be better served by treating the character as being, in effect, sighted in most situations. But adding in minor advantages and disadvantages related to the manner in which they "see." That will do a much better job of imitating those sorts of characters. As an example of a minor disadvantage - loud, cacophonous noises would affect those characters as does dim light or darkness for the normally sighted, whereas true darkness is an advantage to the blind fighter vs. the normally sighted.

Quote from: Bren;910448Blind no more usefully describes those sorts of characters than it does Daredevil.

The problem is that GURPS is a rigorously "realistic" simulationist point-based build system.  You can take the approach that Nick Parker really only has Quirk: Blind (-1) rather than Blindness (-50), but RAW there's no in between.  You can hack something, but at that point you may as well just toss out the GURPS level of detail in favour of HERO's generic Physical Disadvantage.

Quote from: daniel_ream;910460The problem is that GURPS is a rigorously "realistic" simulationist point-based build system.

My point was that Rutger Hauer's Vietnam veteran, Zatoichi, and Daredevil aren't realistically blind. Treating their blindness realistically is missing the point and, as we have already heard, it doesn't give you the character you were looking for without either (a) a different definition of the blind disadvantage or (b) the original disadvantage definition and a massive infusion of extra build points.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910419I tried real hard to stat up a blind swordsman in Gurps; patterned after Rutger Hauer in Blind Fury, because I didn't know about Zatoichi. That was hard to get right without a gazillion points.

What was the problem?  The extra sensory aspects?  Or the combat skills?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;910468What was the problem?  The extra sensory aspects?  Or the combat skills?

The awareness, but more than that, the combat skills. It's been a while since I tried to build it, and actually run a combat. I might try it again. It was Gurps 3e basic set (I can't remember if I was using the martial arts supplement--probably not). The main issue was overcoming the penalties from the Blindness disadvantage with either high attributes, high skills or advantages (from what I remember).


Edit: Interestingly, I never tried it with Hero, and obviously not in the latest GURPS iteration. But it was fun trying that sort of thing with the GURPS toolkit.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910473The awareness, but more than that, the combat skills. It's been a while since I tried to build it, and actually run a combat. I might try it again. It was Gurps 3e basic set (I can't remember if I was using the martial arts supplement--probably not). The main issue was overcoming the penalties from the Blindness disadvantage with either high attributes, high skills or advantages (from what I remember).


Edit: Interestingly, I never tried it with Hero, and obviously not in the latest GURPS iteration. But it was fun trying that sort of thing with the GURPS toolkit.

I've never seen the film, so I don't know anything about the character past what you've told us but how limiting is his blindness?  Because if it was just a minor nuisance, then the 1 point Quirk: Blind would have likely been enough.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910473The awareness, but more than that, the combat skills. It's been a while since I tried to build it, and actually run a combat. I might try it again. It was Gurps 3e basic set (I can't remember if I was using the martial arts supplement--probably not). The main issue was overcoming the penalties from the Blindness disadvantage with either high attributes, high skills or advantages (from what I remember).


Edit: Interestingly, I never tried it with Hero, and obviously not in the latest GURPS iteration. But it was fun trying that sort of thing with the GURPS toolkit.

Buying bonuses is always more expensive in GURPS then the point savings you get for penalties (since they want people's scores to stay in the 6-16 range where 3d6 works well). Taking the blindness disadvantage and then offsetting the penalty (I can't remember, -4? -6?) with a really high combat skill is a serious net loss. I'd more likely take the disadvantage Blindness with a serious limitation (or whatever it is called in GURPS, I've been using HERO for too long) roughly equivalent to "only takes effect in ~10% of situations" because seriously, as Bren said, those guys aren't actually disadvantaged nearly at all (except maybe having to reveal that they aren't disadvantaged like people think they are).

Quote from: Christopher Brady;910483I've never seen the film, so I don't know anything about the character past what you've told us but how limiting is his blindness?  Because if it was just a minor nuisance, then the 1 point Quirk: Blind would have likely been enough.

It's been a long while since I last saw the movie. The guy's blindness didn't impede him from from going toe to toe with Sho Kosugi (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi-q2wfKgQo) and kicking lesser ass all over the movie. Yet, like the battle shows, he can't tell that it was just an apple that Sho threw at him. Another example: He was aware enough to to not step on dog shit, but then he can't recognize that the animal he steps over isn't a dog, but an alligator. It's almost like his super senses only kick in when something is a threat.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;910493Buying bonuses is always more expensive in GURPS then the point savings you get for penalties (since they want people's scores to stay in the 6-16 range where 3d6 works well). Taking the blindness disadvantage and then offsetting the penalty (I can't remember, -4? -6?) with a really high combat skill is a serious net loss. I'd more likely take the disadvantage Blindness with a serious limitation (or whatever it is called in GURPS, I've been using HERO for too long) roughly equivalent to "only takes effect in ~10% of situations" because seriously, as Bren said, those guys aren't actually disadvantaged nearly at all (except maybe having to reveal that they aren't disadvantaged like people think they are).

It was a pretty steep penalty (for Blindness). I hadn't thought about using a Quirk, because there was a disadvantage called Blindness already. I wanted to "model" how I thought his senses really must have worked. That's part of the fun (and frustration).

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;910509It was a pretty steep penalty (for Blindness). I hadn't thought about using a Quirk, because there was a disadvantage called Blindness already. I wanted to "model" how I thought his senses really must have worked. That's part of the fun (and frustration).

Now, this is a different system (M&M 3e), but my deaf superhero had a device that compensated for his deafness, but was easily removed, so it was still a complication, but not a very big one.  He doesn't have super senses either, just compensated for a lack of sense.

It's sounds more like the Blind Fury guy isn't super sensitive, but rather has a great sense of spacial awareness.  He knows where 'things' are, but the specifics don't actually matter.  It sounds more like a quirk, rather out an out super senses, a la Marvel Daredevil.

I'm blue collar. I work in a factory. I've worked numerous jobs in manufacturing for the past thirty-two years. I don't think it has any bearing on what I do or do not like in role-playing games. It's just my job. It pays my bills. It isn't my 'career'. To me that is like comparing cheese to chalk.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;910510Now, this is a different system (M&M 3e), but my deaf superhero had a device that compensated for his deafness, but was easily removed, so it was still a complication, but not a very big one.  He doesn't have super senses either, just compensated for a lack of sense.

It's sounds more like the Blind Fury guy isn't super sensitive, but rather has a great sense of spacial awareness.  He knows where 'things' are, but the specifics don't actually matter.  It sounds more like a quirk, rather out an out super senses, a la Marvel Daredevil.

Since the blind fury guy is probably patterned after Zatoichi (according to wikipedia, the movie is based on a Zatoichi movie), maybe this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zatoichi#Character
"His lightning-fast fighting skill is incredible, with his sword held in a reverse grip; this, combined with his unflappable steel-nerved wits in a fight, his keen ears, sense of smell and proprioception, all render him a formidable adversary.

It figures there's a trope for it: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlindWeaponmaster :)

Quote from: CRKrueger;910039How did the knowledge of this truism ever get lost?  That's what roleplaying is about - not being you.

The Timelords RPG (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timelords_%28role-playing_game%29) wants a word with you.

Quote from: daniel_ream;910460The problem is that GURPS is a rigorously "realistic" simulationist point-based build system.  You can take the approach that Nick Parker really only has Quirk: Blind (-1) rather than Blindness (-50), but RAW there's no in between.  You can hack something, but at that point you may as well just toss out the GURPS level of detail in favour of HERO's generic Physical Disadvantage.

You need to decide what you want, first. Zatoichi isn't particularly realistic, so do you want to represent something that will play just like the film you saw, or do you want a realistic representation of a blind swordmaster who is somehow still super-good? Either way it's going to cost a lot of points, and since GURPS specifically models so many situations, you'll need to think hard about how you want it to actually work, because it's a complex situation that's not abstracted away in GURPS - it's not just a matter of -X skill to be blind.

What I do for a living is so far away from the person I am anyways, I just can't subscribe to this theory. I also haven't seen any evidence of it. My best friend would happily play a factory grunt like himself, as long as the adventure wasn't "cleaning chicken guts with a power hose" all night long. Because that would bore our entire table I think. I have yet to talk a member of CSIS into joining my table, but if I do, I'll tell you if s/he refuses to play a spy or not when it happens.

At one point I refused to play nerdy characters because being ridiculed in character brought to mind the ridicule I endured in real life, and that wasn't a lot of fun. Easily enough. Once I stopped caring what people thought of my personal interests, that limit also faded.