2d4chan - User contributions [en]

Vashtorr

2023-05-23T03:43:31Z

2601:1C0:5001:5320:B5F3:D8BD:A6BC:B9A4: I don't get what this quote as saying honeslty.

{{Wh40k-stub}}
{{Heresy}}
{{topquote|In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.|President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address}}
{{topquote|[[Meme|The future is now, old man]].|Vashtorr, trading barbs with [[Hashut|his predecessor]]}}
[[File:Vashtorr against some unlucky primaris.jpg|420px|thumb|right|We've been trying to reach you about your [[METAL BOXES|car]]'s extended warranty.]]
'''Vashtorr the Arkifane''' is a [[daemon]] unaligned to any of the [[Chaos Gods]] who holds dominion over the Forge of Souls; though he has no loyalty to any of the four major Chaos Gods, he has established himself as a demigod by acting as their shared [[Soul Grinder|arms dealer]], thus making him important enough to deter any of them from trying to attack him. A being born from humanity's drive to create and invent, his technological skills have made him not only a figure of adoration among the [[Dark Mechanicus]] and [[Warpsmiths]] among the dark powers, but also the mastermind behind the newfangled [[Arks of Omen]], weaponized [[Space Hulk]]s molded by his own flesh that are part of [[Abaddon]]'s renewed offensive on the Nachmund Gauntlet. The two of them now seek the fragments of an ancient relic known only as "The Key", which if reassembled would give its wielder the power to define the fate of the galaxy itself. This is because the Key would allow its wielder to open a portal to anywhere in existence, including to a secret vault hidden in the [[Webway]] which is apparently jam full of all kinds of weapons and knowledge left behind by the [[Old Ones]] during the [[War in Heaven]].

Curiously enough, Vashtorr might actually be more along the lines of [[Lawful Evil]] rather than whatever spectrum the big 4 decide to be on any given day. While the contracts he brokers with daemons willing to become Soul Grinders are never exactly fair, he's a stickler for the exact terms of each contract and will always uphold them. Often, it's the contracted daemons who grow too greedy and thus break the terms of their own accord.

In any event, despite the best efforts of the [[Imperium of Man]], [[Farsight Enclaves]], or his demonic rival [[Be'lakor]] to stop him he ultimately managed to get all the artifact pieces he needs. So at the end of the Arks of Omen narrative, he is able to form the Key or “dissonance engine” as it’s also known by rebuilding the shattered remnants of the [[Dark Angels]] homeworld of [[Caliban (Warhammer 40,000) |Caliban]] and turning it into a [[Daemon World]] which Vashtorr rechristened as Wyrmwood. As it turns out the whole damn planet was the key the whole time. The Dark Angels were as you can well imagine rightly pissed off by this revelation and the fact their home world was now fully a demonic hellhole. However before the Dark Angels or their newly returned Primarch [[Lion El'Jonson]] could try and kill Vashtorr or his Chaos allies for this offense, Vashtorr activated the Dissonance Engine and opened a new portal into the Webway that absorbed Wyrmwood and thus allowed him and his allies to escape. Now the rest of the galaxy can only hope and pray that someone amongst them can track Vashtorr down and stop him before he can locate the Webway vault and uses it to ascend to godhood.

Notably, there's been no word about his presence in the [[Age of Sigmar|Mortal Realms]]. On one hand, his presence is so recent that there was likely no chance for him to even appear in the most recent Chaos Battletomes, meaning that GW has plenty of time to write up some sort of plot hook to add him in and preserve the pan-universal theming of daemons. However, it's also likely that he just won't show up there as the forces of Chaos in that setting don't really have much on the tech angle - but c'mon, there's no way you wouldn't want Warp-corrupted [[Kharadron Overlords|steampunk dwarf zepplins]]. <strike>Also, [[Hashut]] is the one filling his niche of "evil god of industry" for fantasy/AoS.</strike> Not necessarily. Hashut in both Fantasy and Age of Sigmar is the Chaos God of Tyranny, whereas Vashtorr seems to be more of the embodiment of the innovative spirit. For Hashut, it is not the Dawi Zarr's use of technology that feeds him, but the subjugation and suffering that they use to fuel their infernal forges and their binding of technology with souls of the damned and daemons forever bound within Daemon Engines. Vashtorr does not operate in the same way, as he does not deceive or manipulate, but instead seeks to innovate, modify and grow as people are pushed to ever more dangerous extremes of development. In that sense, Hashut and Vashtorr are just complimentary in that tyranny does not necessitate the harsh conditions of the forge, but in the grim darkness of the far future where technological innovation is dying, the two may overlap more than one would hope.

While holding considerable power in the [[Warp]], his efforts to become a [[malal|fifth Chaos God]] have so far been stymied by a lack of influence over the Materium, and so he sees his alliance with Abaddon as an opportunity to establish himself in realspace. Thus far, the only real opposition he faces is from [[Be'lakor]], who undoubtedly does not like the competition for his own attempts in ascending to godhood. However, like his parents, even he hesitates at making a direct offensive lest he find himself thrown into a pit of thousands of daemon engines.

==Crunch==
[[File:VashtorrArkifane.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Ooooo, pointy!]]
As you might expect from the lord of the Forge of Souls, Vashtorr's abilities excel in both empowering allied Daemon Engines and crippling the machines of his enemies. His main ability, ''Will of the Arkifane'', has one of three modes that can be chosen from in each Command Phase. The first one adds +1 to hit to all Chaos Space Marine Daemon Engines (other than aircraft, Characters, and superheavies) within 3" of him, the second causes an enemy unit within 18" to have their guns' range get cut in half, and the last one halves the movement and Attacks of an enemy vehicle within 18".

He's fairly good in a fight himself, with plenty of Wounds, the {{W40kKeyword|FLY}} keyword, Warp Strike, a 4++ invulnerable save, and the ability to reduce incoming damage by 1. His weapons are his claws (a 12" S5 AP-2 flamer) and his hammer (an AP-2 power fist that deals 4 mortal wounds to a targeted vehicle on a 5+). As an Agent of Chaos he can join any Legion or Chaos faction without breaking their mono-faction bonuses, making him a good way of supplementing any army that could use a little extra mechanized oomph (particularly when supplemented by his Army of Renown rules).

{{Template:Daemons-Characters}}
[[Category:Dark Mechanicus]]

Epidemius

2023-05-23T03:36:50Z

2601:1C0:5001:5320:B5F3:D8BD:A6BC:B9A4: /* Warhammer Fantasy */

[[File:Epidemius.jpg|250px|thumb|right|MOVE IT LITTLE ONES! THOSE PLAGUES AND DISEASES WON'T CATALOGUE THEMSELVES!]]
'''Epidemius''' is the greatest of the [[Plaguebearer]]s and Nurgle's favourite little tallyman. This little fucker is in charge of searching for disease, bacteria, and more of... [[Luke|them...]], as well as noting the potency of Nurgle's new plagues, and coming up with [[FATAL|interesting new symptoms for Nurgle's new plagues]]. He is also a lazy fuck, just like his patron, and literally has his own moving squad of [[Nurgling|Nurglings]] that carry him around. Even as Epidemius surveys and takes notes of the spread of filth and decay, Nurgle knows this, and starts working on some more [[Plaguebearer|nasty shit]]. Because of this, Epidemius focuses on his task even if he takes a power fist to the face, cuz say he were to make an error or untimely observation, Nurgle would probably start using him as the squeegee for his plague cauldron. He's even uglier than a normal [[Plaguebearer]], and the nurglings that carry him also secrete oil that he uses to write with (on pages made of their discarded skin). Lovely.

==Warhammer Fantasy==
{{Topquote|MOM! GET THE PAINTER!!!! MOMMYY!!! MOMM!!!! MOM!!!|One of the Altdorf cannon engineer who "accidently" shot Epidemius after rotating his cannon 360 degrees.}}

He is known as the "Maggot King" and he is Nurgle’s chosen Tallyman, one of the seven Proctors of Pestilence and the cataloguer of all the Plaguelord's diseases. In the end time, he got [[/v/|YOLO NO SCOP'ED]] by a cannon ball during the battle of Altdorf. Must've be a pretty easy target for a fat lazy couch potato. OF course he's a deamon so he is very much not dead and was just sent back to Nurgle garden to turn in a rather unsatisfactory report card to grandfather.

==Horus Heresy==
He was summoned on Calth during the Horus Heresy, and probably had his [[Anal Circumference|arse torn wide-open]] by the [[Ultramarines|Ultrasmurfs]], or [[Roboute Guilliman|Rowboat Girlyman]]. Poor Epidemius.

{{Daemons-Characters}}
[[Category: Maggotkin of Nurgle]]

Gamemaster

2023-05-23T02:33:29Z

2601:1C0:5001:5320:B5F3:D8BD:A6BC:B9A4: /* Types of GM */

[[Image:The DM.jpg|thumb|right|Hope to god he knows the rules.]]The '''Gamemaster''', often called the '''GM''', is the source of all your fun and all your sorrow in a role-playing game. An adept or experienced GM will make the worlds of the RPG come to life, and present a vision that makes you feel as if you're really there. In other cases, the GM can come off as a total dick. The GM is responsible for describing the game world, playing the role of its inhabitants ([[NPC]]s and monsters) and adjudicating the results of your actions.

==Other Terms==
Various games refer to the Game Master with different names:

*Dungeon Master, "DM" (later editions [[Dungeons & Dragons]])
*Judge ([[Judges Guild]])
*Keeper ([[Call of Cthulhu]], [[Trail of Cthulhu]])
*Storyteller, "ST" (All [[World of Darkness]] games, most [[White Wolf]] games)
*Referee (early editions of D&D, [[Traveller]], various)
*Maim Master or Aedile ([[FATAL]], lol)
*Werewizard ([[Monster horror show|Monster Horrorshow]])
*Zombie Master ([[All Flesh Must be Eaten]])
*Hollyhock God ([[Nobilis]])
*Sargon ([[Hero Quest]])
*Marshal ([[Deadlands]])
*Big Mack Daddy ([[Stuperpowers]])
*Cardmaster ([[Sine Requie]])
*Lead Narrator ([[Cosmic Patrol]])
*Overseer ([[Fallout PnP]])
*Ghostmaster ([[Ghostbusters RPG]])
*A.I. ([[Red Dwarf - The RPG]])
*Story Guide ([[Ars Magica]])
*Master of Ceremonies, "MC" ([[Apocalypse World]])
*Labyrinth Lord ([[Labyrinth Lord]])
*Myth Master ([[MYFAROG]])
*HōLmeister, "HM" ([[Human Occupied Landfill]])
*Handler ([[Delta Green]])
* maze controller ([[Mazes and Monsters]])
*Quest Master "QM" (online play-by-posts)
*Kalandmester "KM" - literally Adventure Master ([[M.A.G.U.S.]])

==How do I shot GM?==
[[Image:Werewizard.jpg|thumb|right|The best advice on how to be a good GM ever.]]
A lot of people come asking for advice on how to run a role-playing game, but the simple truth of the matter is that a game master is not born; rather, made. Only experience, reading and knowing the group of people you play with will help you become really good. Different GMs have different approaches, some improvise everything, others painstakingly prepare every map, encounter and NPC the players come across. This way of doing things rarely pays off, as players usually hold to long-standing player customs of shrugging off all over your meticulously-planned work, as they decide to take one wrong turn or ignore one person that was supposed to put them on the right track you laid down for them, and wander off in the complete opposite direction. Some GMs counter this by [[railroading]] their players, which is generally seen as an [[RAGE|douche]] way of doing things. When being railroaded, the players typically become little more than unwilling spectators to the GM's personal fantasy movie, which usually (read: always) sucks.

If you know what your players want you're one step closer to running a good game. Some just want to kick some goblin arse, others want to get involved in the political intrigue at court, others don't really know what they want. Try to lead them on adventures that involve all the characters and give them all challenges that depend on what they do best. If you have a rogue in the party make sure to have some sneaking or trap-finding to be done, if you have a barbarian be sure there will be opportunity to kick some ass and so on. Talk to your players.

===Tips for being a good GM===
No matter what your GM playstyle is or what your RPG is, there are a number of universal truths that help any GM run his game.

*[[Rule_0|Rule 0:]] '''Have fun.''' That's why you and everyone else is playing. When the game stops being fun, that's a sure sign to take a break for a while and come back another day when your enthusiasm has built up again.

*1. '''Talk to your players.''' Don't just "tell", otherwise your players can come to resent you as a tyrant or a railroader and be no fun to be around. Two-Way communication helps a lot even when you're in the middle of a long script of text such as clarifying points about the setting or the rules.

*2. '''DON'T''' be [[That Guy]]. It's just so much worse when it is the GM. You are presumably hosting the days event, so be a gracious host and that'll encourage them to come back. ''(note that doesn't mean providing all the munchies and other entertainment, just be patient with your group)''

*3. '''Improvisation''' is a MAJOR tool in your arsenal, even if you are running a heavily scripted adventure. Since you know the ending to your story you can incorporate player decisions into the overall plot and keep the story moving no matter what they do, which is kind of the point. A good improv can stop the campaign from being derailed and keep the players entertained by the twisting of events.

*4. '''NO''' is a word you will probably use often, so learn to say it in different ways or come up with alternatives. For example: Sometimes a player will come to you with an awesome character build but unfortunately it may break your game, so finding ways to negotiate him away from it into something more suitable becomes a necessity. That might require some give-and-take on your part to keep the enjoyment factor in, but remember ultimately it's your decision, so don't feel pressured.
**Similarly '''No Beats Yes'''. This is a problem for very new GMs (and White Wolf storytellers). Every group will have rogue players that try to do some foolhearty or unwise action that the rest of the group disagrees with. As a GM, it's important to allow the players to come to a consensus about the party's actions before listing the horrible consequences of an impulsive player's choice. The players don't ever need to be at each other's throats or considering ejecting a player for their ADHD if you as a GM give them a timing window to talk about group actions.

*5. '''Rolling the dice''' is an acceptable means of making shit up, even if you actually aren't making it up. Rolling the dice in front of the players ''(or even behind your GM screen)'' gives them the impression that a decision is out of your hands and that the events unfolding in front of them are completely even-handed and fair, even when you already knew what the outcome was going to be. Even killer GMs who throw 20 great wyrm red dragons at groups one after the other can generate less complaints if the players thought you rolled for them randomly.
**There is an argument for the GM not fluffing dice rolls, because it can lead to a reduction in the impact the players have on the game by negating their mistakes or triumphs. While this argument ''is'' valid, and when done egregiously it can ruin player experiences and immersion. It ignores the fundamental position of the GM: they are not a "player" in the same way that everyone else at the table is, they don't build their characters and monsters using the same methods and are not restricted by available resources when preparing encounters. The GM is instead a facilitator for the progression of the narrative; even if that narrative is only "Dungeon: what do?" they still need to make sure the game still moves forward and doesn't get bogged down, that everyone at the table gets their moment to shine, and that the continuity of one session (whether railroaded or not) are carried on to the next session. While this is not a justification for griefing the players, sometimes you simply ''have'' to let an unfortunate dice roll slide for the sake of the game, your ability to adapt to unexpected rolls can be dependent on your GM style and the result does not need to necessarily be good or bad, whether your players come back regularly will be the main indication.

*6. '''Work your players''' for their rewards. it's unlikely to be very fun if players find artefact-level gear all over the place / level up every hour / have the immediate and utter respect of every new NPC they meet (unless that is your particular thing). It's important to always have a carrot to dangle in front of the players and keep drawing them forward. When they catch it, give them another slightly shinier goal to chase, but keep it in small steps and don't overload them with rewards at the end of each adventure. This makes character growth memorable and makes the players more attached to their PCs in the long run.

*7 '''Do the Research''', when you use real-world or in-universe analogues that players might aleady be familiar with; such as military rankings, feudal titles, established figures or events ''(fictional or historical)'' or even technical wording of theories or philosophies. It's not hard, and you don't need a degree in the subject, but you'll look a fool when your players notice something wrong and could do a quick wikipedia search to point it out. ''GM fiat'' only gets you so far and you can start losing credibility if you expect players to buy into an anachronistic campaign setting without a suitable explanation. So basically: ''Know what you're talking about.''

*8 '''Learn Pacing''', especially when writing your own material. It sounds obvious, but figure out the difference between ''Encounters'' and ''Adventures'' then make them discrete things and break them up by having not have the same things happen twice in a row. Fight after fight after fight gets boring, even for hardcore hack-and-slash players; while repetitive adventure themes end up resolving themselves predictably and players stop caring.
**An encounter should take no more than a two or three hours, even if it's a combat when the game gets bogged down by turns and dice rolls, any longer and players lose interest. But don't extend them needlessly if the players seem to breeze through too quickly/easily. Adding "reinforcements" if the fight goes too quickly is just lazy, just move on to the next encounter.
**Adventures should be a handful of encounters and take around two or three sessions, it should not be the entire campaign setting itself. That means inserting sensible "start" and "end" points with reasonable objectives. If a single adventure takes weeks of gameplay to progress through, your players will forget key facts and objectives as the story goes on and it becomes harder to keep the group on track without forcefully railroading them.
**Campaigns can have goals, but are not necessary. If you plan for the party to kill the evil king, don't make that the group's immediate objective from the get go, otherwise you create one really long adventure, instead you should build your way to that episodically with a series of adventures.

*9 '''Don't write the ending before the players get involved.''' One of the most important rules of war is that No Plan Survives Contact With The Enemy, meaning that people's actions are very difficult to predict with meaningful certianity, and they will very frequently try something you didn't think of, so [[Not As Planned]] occurs exponentially more often than [[Just As Planned]]. The same is true with GMing.

In the end there is really only one rule, Rule 0, which states: Have fun. Meaning everyone at the table. Make sure everything is moving forward, try to avoid stalling and monotony. If the players are really stuck just throw something at them, even ninjas. Keep things happening and everyone interested.

If people aren't excited or interested it's often better to pull out another game, switch GMs, watch a movie or just WATCH ALL THE PORN (or play FATAL).

===Difficult Players===
As a GM you WILL find that some players will make your life difficult:
*Whether it be [[munchkin]]s who blatantly abuse rules, [[derp|''(or encourage you to house rule certain things that they could not otherwise do that just so happen to benefit their characters)'']]
*...or it could be endless [[powergamer|optimisers]] who constantly want to [[retcon|reroll]] their characters every time a new splatbook comes out, then get all moody when you don't let them play the character they want to play.
*...or it could be the uber-hardcore roleplayers that get extremely loud/overbearing at the table or [[Lawful Stupid|charge headfirst]] into trouble with a battlecry "LEEEEEEEEEROOOY" ''"because that's what their character would do"'' and make life difficult for other players.
*...or it could be the lolrandom [[Chaotic Stupid]] PC that rolls dice to decide how their character acts and tries to do standup instead of playing the game.

There is one very handy piece of advice to remember: '''"The game will continue without them"'''.
That is not actually a threat (though it can be used as such), it's more a reminder to yourself that no matter how bad a player attempts to [[The Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment|screw up your game]], your game will survive as long as you want it to.
Overpowered PCs compared to the rest of the party can generally be ignored or tarpitted while the rest of the party gets on with the actual campaign / abusersof numerical advantages can be comfortably "noped" behind your GM screen during stat contests / overbearing roleplayers can be executed or put in jail on the spot for stupidity.

The only thing that can actually ruin your game outright is a [[TPK]] or [[Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies|you just scream "fuck it" and give up]], which you as the GM are always the final arbiter of. If this one player has created a situation where they somehow managed to survive it all, then jolly for them... the game is still over and all of their effort has come to nothing.

====New / Replacement / Returning Characters====
As a subset of "difficult" players; there can be unseen difficulties when new players join your group, or return after an extended period of time and expect to play the same character. Furthermore you can often find players ''(usually [[Powergamers]])'' who contrive of flimsy excuses to kill/retire their character in order to roll up a new build that they like, essentially introducing a "new" character to the game which is already ongoing. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of this, but it can introduce a few problems to the table:

One problem is the plot rationale for the introduction, particularly at high levels. If the players have been playing for a long time and have established themselves as influential figures, then why is the new guy just as good as ''([[Powergamer|or better than]])'' they are? without having done any of the legwork they they have? and why hasn't he shown his face before now? This is most often covered in Dungeon Master Guides and rulebooks, it generally needs some degree of creativity to make sense of the new introduction and some give-and-take on behalf of the whole group to accommodate the new arrival. The new player/character will be left out of a lot of the group history and the in-jokes, and presumably won't have any of the unique artefacts or unique campaign options that can only be achieved through actual time spent at the table ''(quite a lot of [[Prestige Class]] prerequisites come to mind)''.

The second issue is the sudden jump of experience their "new" character receive, as any player presented with a rulebook and a specified sum of experience and cash will cherry pick their favourite options and powergame with the system, even if it wasn't their intention in the first place. This is less apparent with groups that haven't been playing long, or with particularly small groups who really need all the help they can get. But in large groups or groups with a lot of history; the introduction of a freshly minted Space Marine or a level 18 [[CoDzilla]] that never existed before can really upset the group dynamics. At the start of a campaign, players will write their back stories, then branch their characters as the story progresses, picking up feats, talents or skills based on the circumstances of the plot, such as the ability to swim, drive, speak new languages or have fighters being able to cast low level cantrips, or wizards multi-classing as rogues out of necessity when the group changes or the plot moves forward. Contrast with freshly joined players who will usually build the character first then write the story for that build, utterly neglecting the sacrifices other players needed to make to get to the same point.

While RPG groups are not necessarily fragile ecosystems and players do their best to get on with what their characters do best, some players can come to resent [[That Guy|"the new guy"]], even if the actual player has been with the group from the start. This goes double in rulesets which have persistent meta-characteristic based on [[Black Crusade|infamy]], [[Legend of the Five Rings|status, honor]], or include [[Dark Heresy|persistent injuries]]. Grizzled adventurers with psychological problems, troublesome injuries or particular levels of corruption can find it difficult to keep up to a Paladin fresh out of the packet being played with a lot of enthusiasm.

There are a number of schools of thought on the matter that help resolve this:
*'''Have the player start out at level 1:''' This allows the player to create a fresh new character and see them grow as the campaign develops, as well as allowing them the opportunity to change their mind over their build when the story moves forward. It can be a harsh option that is only really suitable for low-mid level groups. Otherwise it can make new players feel useless or superfluous when there are large level gaps and big differences in ability. However because the distance between levels usually increases in most RPG rulesets, the new player will catch up relatively quickly often jumping whole levels after a few encounters, but will usually remain behind the rest of the group, which at least recognises the work the existing players have put into the campaign. It should also be the go-to option for brand-new RPG players who don't know what they are doing, since the paperwork of playing a high level character can be daunting for those not familiar with the rules.
**Hand in hand with this option is the ability to run separate side-quests for the new player(s) in question. Giving them their own plot advancement that does not unfairly elevate their power level without the benefit of actually ''earning'' the experience. This often gives a satisfying experience for everyone involved without complaints.
*'''Have the player start out at the equivalent to the lowest level player:''' This is perhaps one of the fairest options, especially if members of the group are itinerant and only show up in dribs and drabs between sessions. It provides a basic entry level for the player to meet that is not too far behind the rest of the group with the opportunity to catch up and possibly overtake if they become regulars at the table.
*'''Have the player start out equivalent to the rest of the group, with caveats:''' Some parties allow a new character to join at an equal level but impose certain conditions on the player's character. Usually providing direct input on the characters backstory and build. This is often based on the party's needs, so if they are missing a key element such as a Rogue or a Cleric, then the new guy is guided down a path set for them, or required to take certain options that are necessary based on the way the campaign has developed. This might wreck a powergamers lv1-lv20 netlist build, but considering that the experience is ''free'' when everyone else already did the work, they can't really complain if it allows the GM to more easily slot that character into the world without upsetting the balance of the party and the setting.

There should be no substitute for actual time spent at the table. In all situations: If a character build is dependent on certain external factors such as permissions from in-game entities like commanders or royals or is dependent upon the intervention of divine figures, then they probably shouldn't be hand-waved just so the new player can get his build unless you were also willing to hand-wave these for the existing players who have been there longer. If one player has to play through several sessions of his own specific character arc just to get access to certain options or abilities then you should firmly insist that the new/returning player stop trying to argue that his character spent his downtime doing cooler things than the players.

===A Rebuttal From [[That Guy]]===
[[File:Enchanted Piss Forest cropped.png|300px|right]]
What kind of after-school-special-carebears-bullshit is this? As the GM your one and only duty is to '''win'''. Why in the name of Tiamat would you want to help the players anyways? They sit around your basement, drink your beer, [[herp]] their [[derp]]s, and shit all over your carefully constructed masterpiece. They aren't your friends, they are ''animals''. [[TPK|And there's only one way to deal with animals]]. That chest? It had a [[Sphere of Annihilation]]. The new [[Exalted|warstrider]] you built? It gets [[Rock of Doom|one-shotted by the imperial manse]]. Your [[psyker]]? Fails his perils roll and summons a bloodthirster. Oh you survived? [[Rocks fall, everyone dies|Deploying rocks now]]. They might hate you for it but [[Railroading| its the only way to keep the story progressing in the right direction (yours)]]. After all to rule one must either be feared or loved, and who could love you?

<strike>''And this elegan/tg/entlemen is why we never let [[That Guy]] GM.''</strike>

Shut up. Just shut the hell up. You know what? You're dead. You died. Orcus reached through a tear in the abyss and pulped you like an orange. Now get ready to roll a new character, we're playing my ''[[Magical realm|erotically charged]] [[My Little Pony]] [[Ponyfinder|homebrew sys]]-'' {{BLAM}} '''Oh, don't mind me, I just crawled out of the 40K Section.'''
'''''Praise the Emprah.'''''

==Types of GM==
A description of commonly found play styles of GM and their pros & cons. ''(hoping that more will be added over time)'' Note that it's easily possible to be multiple types at once.

*'''Aspiring Author''' - Hand-crafts his own campaign setting, populating it with "unique" characters, factions and history. The campaign will often grow with the players, taking shape based on the things that they do which can be extremely satisfying.
**'''Pros''' - Can make for a very unique experience if the GM takes his time with the setting, particularly in creating unexpected/memorable scenarios for the players. Also becomes very difficult to meta-game since players don't necessarily know how the system works ''(and therefore how to break it)''
**'''Cons''' - If he's not very good, the "uniqueness" of the setting will be contrived / cliche tropes that the players already know, and will get tired of if being sold to them as "different". Also if the GM is not committed to the group, adventures may take a long while to write up and cause the players to forget what they were even playing. Furthermore, can be overprotective of his setting ''(particularly if he IS an author)'' and refuse to budge when it comes to harsh decisions or situations regarding the greater universe, though he is GM so fair play to him for that. But be aware that just because someone is excellent at narrative doesn't always make for a good GM; some encounters may drag out for "impact" or "effect" but don't always translate to good flow for a group of players, leaving them bored. Or they mismatch the power level of the opponents to the party because "that's what they would be in-universe".
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - [[The Lord of the Rings|"The players have saved the princess, proved their innocence and slain the dragon, then sail off to the west for a comfortable retirement. The End."]]
**'''Favored Games:''' - Homebrewed settings, [[World of Darkness]], [[FATE]], [[Nobilis]]

*'''Canon Defender / Fanboy''' - Applicable when using an established setting/adventure modules ''(Forgotten Realms, 40k, Star Wars etc)'' they usually know their fluff better than most and try to maintain the integrity as much as they possibly can by restricting how much damage the players will inevitably attempt to cause by breaking it. Or by restricting their movements to specific "breakable" portions of the in-game universe where the players cannot cause significant harm. ''(eg: no visiting Terra since the players will obviously attempt to murder the Emperor)''
**'''Pros''' - The "realism" of the campaign is maintained, so if the players know their lore they remain familiar with the setting no matter how much they try to screw it over. By necessity, he is heavily invested in the setting, meaning that he will be reliably consistent with the players and one of the most enthusiastic of GM types. So if the GM is well versed enough, the session can be just as immersive as those run by The Actor, just keeping a status quo that won't come crashing down around the group.
**'''Cons''' - Players can feel cheated that they are not interacting with the setting as much as they would like. Meta-gaming is going to happen and arguments will occur with players who think they know the setting better. Also, if a GM is not well versed enough with the setting it WILL devolve into railroading as he won't know how to react to unexpected situations.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - Whenever the ''owner of the setting/universe'' stops publishing material.
**'''Favored Games:''' - The official RPG of whatever canon when available ([[Star Wars RPG]]/[[Star Wars D20]], the [[Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay]] series, [[Serenity]], hundreds of others), or when not available or not well done, generic systems that work well with the chosen canon: [[GURPS]], [[FATE]]

*'''Formula/Dice GM''' - What the rulebooks often expect a GM to be. Follows the adventure modules religiously, but unlike the canon defender is more interested in the crunch than the fluff. When shit happens, he will likely refer to whatever table of events / random encounter lists / pre-generated characters that are available. He is in it just as much as the players are; just along for the ride.
**'''Pros''' - Things tend to go most according to plan since a rule can often be found to cover most situations. Is also the least likely to cause a fuss with the players, since he's playing the game as much as they are. So nothing is personal with him.
**'''Cons''' - The situations can occur that often feel out of place to the players; such as repetitive random encounters or things not happening in the appropriate locations due to the result of a dice roll. ''(meeting a merchant in the middle of a dungeon?)'' though if the players are light-hearted enough this can be source of amusement and amusing material that may be worth a chuckle long after the game is over. Also, he needs to know the rules he's deferring to backwards and forwards, or the game will move at a snail's pace.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - Whenever the ''RPG publisher'' stops publishing material
**'''Favored Games:''' - almost stereotypically [[Pathfinder]] or [[D&D]]

*'''Turncoat Player''' - Longtime players (most often [[Powergamers]]) who want to give the GM chair a shot, often thinking they can [[butthurt|do it better than the previous GM]] since they have sat through the experience of being a player and want to do it differently. Often with a list of things they want to change like an election manifesto.
**'''Pros''' - If they can learn restraint, they can be the most sympathetic to the players needs and become one of most adaptable GMs. Also will spend a lot of time with the players developing their characters, crafting well fleshed out back stories and often including an inordinate amount of heirloom items. Additionally if they were a [[that guy]] player there's a good chance they'll be more sympathetic to the previous GM and any future ones after walking a mile in their shoes.
**'''Cons''' - More player experience does not always equal good GM. These GMs can be wishlisters; creating settings that they'd rather play in. Giving the players the '''"best"''' gear, '''"freedom"''' of gameplay, '''"unrestricted"''' access to character options ''(all words which should give proper GMs [[RAGE|headaches]])'' and dish out ridiculous experience and in-situ rewards in an attempt to ingratiate himself with the group and sometimes end up in denial that their sessions have any flaws in them at all. Also, since his campaigns are heavily player focussed, groups may find that encounters become less of a challenge and/or that the universe really is quite hollow and not populated with very interesting NPCs. These campaigns generally have short lifespans, mostly because the players accelerate faster than his ability to come up with new material, or the turncoat gets bored of running the campaign or wants to try a [[Derp|"better"]] ruleset that requires starting all over again, where he's in his element. Additionally as a lesser con, since he is a former player he may be used to thinking in terms of 'optimization' so he may have his NPC's in combat use every trick in the PC's book, such knowing when to focus targets or optimizing action efficiency and so on. Even if he is just doing it because he's used to thinking in that mindset; this can unintentionally make his games much harder even he's not intentionally trying to be a killer GM.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - Whenever the PCs have been prematurely promoted to Generals, Gods or any other point where it makes no sense to continue.
**'''Alternate Ending''' - Turncoat players ''(especially powergamers)'' can go OCD with their campaign, in that he spends too much time crafting NPCs and items, treating them as if they were his very own PCs, then to take things personally when the players outshine them or defeat them. At this point the Turncoat will likely morph into a railroader where they party gets to sit and watch his NPCs interact with each other.
**'''Favored Games:''' - Whatever the group was already playing

*'''The Monty Haul GM''' - Named for former American game show Host [[Monty Hall]], This type of GM [[This Guy|really likes to put a smile on their player's faces]] and they do so by handing out loot, abilities, and boons like Oprah does cars.
**'''Pros''' - ''Loot. Fun. Good.'' The 'Looter Shooter' style of video game for a reason and entire genre of games exist around the cycle of 'do quest to find stuff to do quests with'. Transplanting that game play to a table top is a natural idea if done correctly.
**'''Cons''' - It's easy for a GM like this to go overboard and turn the entire party into a band of Mary Sues, some even going so far as to invent items like a sword of instant monster slaying or an infinite-range missile launcher just to have some form of loot to give the players that they don't already have.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - When the PCs begin weeping over the fact that the world has no more items left to loot, ala Alexander the Great.
**'''Favored Games:''' - D&D, Pathfinder, Dark Heresy. Anything that can have large amount of customized loot to give out.

*'''The Railroader''' - Often appears to have the most desirable skillset as a GM; knows his fluff, the ruleset and gets on well with the group but do not be deceived, he is one of the worst types of style. Recognisable for his lack of dice rolling, also for constantly talking to his players and knowing what happens next without referring to books/notes. Often giving them loads of information to work with and dropping hints about what they could be doing next. If he's good, he will often defer to the players and create a scenario on the fly depending upon what their options are.
**'''Pros''' - One of the smoothest operating GMs, since his plan is constantly in his mind he will quickly have a resolution to most scenarios. Also can be as creative as the aspiring author above, and when telling a good story and is in his interactive element, the players may not ever realise that they have been railroaded at all - which is the sign of a '''REALLY''' good GM.
**'''Cons''' - The players will feel railroaded by his constant hint dropping, and will be punished (sometimes severely) with whatever consequence he has in his twisted mind for not taking those hints. Since there is little to no dice rolling there is often no comeback for the players. This GM will insist ''(and often genuinely believe)'' he is being fair and is NOT railroading you since you ''always had the "option" of following his advice''. Also, since it's all mostly in his mind, if he gets an opinion or a vendetta in there against you, you're pretty much screwed over at this point and are just pawns in his little game that he's playing with himself. Additionally if he can't think fast on his feet, going off the rails may flummox him even if he tries to play along to the party's wishes. Still, if he calls a break to figure out where the hell things are going, at least he's trying, so cut him some slack. Also a combination with the Fanboy can occur where the Railroader puts the players on the side of a major conflict in the setting without actually allowing players to influence it meaningfully.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - [[Rocks fall, everyone dies]] because you went down a corridor the GM ''told'' you not to go down.
**'''Favored Games:''' - [[Paranoia]], [[D&D]], [[Pathfinder]], [[Only War]], though they can pop up with just about any system.

*'''The Actor''' - Basically what the Railroader would be if he weren't in touch with his inner control freak. Like the Author and Railroader, he really wants to tell a story, but like the Turncoat he wants it to be the players'. Generally more interested in the ''role'' part of roleplaying, he tends to put lots of effort into making colorful side characters and setting flavor, but tends to regard combat as a side dish rather than the meat and bones of the game, so he frequently improvises and works off a set of indistinct guidelines more than rigid pre-prepared content.
**'''Pros''' - A very flexible kind of GM. Since he isn't married to a preconceived notion of how the session is going to go, he isn't going to be completely floored unless you [[The Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment|go full Henderson]]. The effort he puts into making the world feel alive can be very immersive, and he tries to make events feel like they matter to the characters instead of just being a story they're blundering through. Prefers to keep the game moving, so he's likely to make a judgement call based on the roll rather than look up the exact rule if he doesn't know it. If you tend to regard constant pointless action scenes and random encounter fights as annoying filler where nothing is happening to advance the story, you and he are going to get along like white rice and soy sauce.
**'''Cons''' - Very prone to taste mismatch. Since he's an actor first, he tends to skimp on combat and hack-and-slash unless it's important to the story. Don't expect lots of random encounters, and don't expect [[Old School Roleplaying|constant life-or-death struggle with everything trying to kill you]]. Frequently has problems with managing lots of simulationist rules, and often jury-rigs solutions out of [[Rule Zero|GM Fiat]] rather than looking up the answers in the book which can be a real problem if he's not consistent about it. If you regard the "standing around talking" part of the game as pointless nonsense fluff between the action and fights, you and he are going to get along like sodium and water.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - Whenever the GM moves house away from your city.
**'''Favored Games:''' - Any system, and settings that allow for large and diverse casts of 'interesting' NPCs. [[D&D]], [[Pathfinder]], [[World of Darkness]], [[Spirit of the Century]]

*'''Submissive / Reactionary GM''' - Not an oxymoron, but rather the polar opposite of the Railroader. Bends over backwards to accommodate the players and their characters, but unlike the Turncoat actually knows how to GM properly by maintaining an interesting storyline and also how to reward the players correctly/fairly for what they do. This style requires a tremendous amount of creativity on the part of the GM even though they can stick to a script / published adventure module. They tend to occur with campaigns involving evil PCs or with novice GMs among more veteran groups where players are given more latitude with their conduct either by design or through the GM's lack of personality / assertiveness.
**'''Pros''' - If the GM is any good then players can get the full package, the freedom to do whatever they want with the in-game universe and it still remain a challenging and enjoyable experience for them.
**'''Cons''' - Sub GMs tend to have a short career, either by giving up or switching to a different style as constantly having to come up with off-script consequences to outrageous player behaviour can burn them out creatively. Or due to a lack of enforced discipline/conduct, player groups become bogged down by conflicting personalities and the group loses its cohesion.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - When the players have dueled each other to the death over the [[Awesome|staff of godhood]] and there is only one left standing. ''(or the campaign gets forgotten about and shelved)''
**'''Favored Games:''' - [[D&D]], [[Pathfinder]], sometimes [[White Wolf]], often generics like [[GURPS]] and [[FATE]].

*'''The Comedian''' [[File:Joke-GM.gif|300px|right]]- A GM that's not afraid to drop gags and jokes into his story. For this GM, Role playing is an activity to be enjoyed, and by slipping the occasional gag into the world in an attempted to get a chuckle from the players. Expect to slay Vampire cults inspired by Twilight, Dwarfs who act like [[Dwarf Fortress|Dorfs]], Have an Octopus [[Sir Brian|disgused as a human however nobody notices thanks to an insane bluff score]], ectra.
**'''Pros''' - Comedians are not above running silly, funny and awesome concepts like the [[Deffwotch]] and when everything is running well and the players and the GM ''click'' they can provide very entertaining games.
**'''Cons''' - The players and the GM '''have''' to be on the same wavelength. Humor is ultimately subjective and a gag that the GM finds funny may be annoying or infuriating to the other players. Further the number of gags, in jokes, and shout outs weaken the overall structure of the game world and makes immersion harder.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - "The players have saved the Dragon from the princess, have been found guilty of [[Murderhobo|murder, looting, and jay walking]], and an ork was the prosecutor, they then run as fast as they can out of the kingdom and go into hiding. The End?"
**'''Favored Games:''' - [[Paranoia]], [[Human Occupied Landfill|HōL]], or any "serious" game, like the [[Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay]] series, [[White Wolf]] games, [[D&D]], where the humor can take on a tone of parody of the normal sort of games those systems/settings expect. A good Comedian can make just about any game into a laugh riot. Perhaps even [[FATAL]] {{BLAM}} {{BLAM|EXTRA HERESY!}}

*'''Killer GM''' [[File:Iamthegamemaster.jpg|300px|right]] - This GM very much believes that their job is adversarial. They're here to fuck you up through any means necessary, either through crunch or fluff. Expect save-or-die traps, Level 20 town guards, monsters out of nowhere, and Tomb of Horrors style dungeons. Very little or even non-existent storyline, just challenge after challenge, essentially creating a P&P Dark Souls. Killer GM are also unique in that they are often a secondary role, difficult is after all easiest part of a story to change so any of the above roles can also run a killer GM game. (Reportedly [[Gary Gygax]] himself was one of these, which might explain the nature of [[Old School Roleplaying]]. many those how were their at dawn of Roleplaying games tend to be the killer as the game was a evolution of war games where PC lives were thought as cheap even to those players, with the point of games was beating the meatgrinder and most long term campaign long character development was enjoying the fact you were able to keep your ant alive long enough that they get god-like powers as a reward.) (as roleplay became more important, the Killer GM is either an old-schooler or old-schooler fan, or a dick). Also if you want to run these kinds of games: for the love of god have a plan B for if your players even as optimized as they are just roll a one and die. Restarting at level 1 not only sucks for them it suck for the st of the party as they now lack a major amount of firepower.
**'''Pros''' - You want a mechanical challenge? This is the GM for you. The perfect opponent for munchkins and murderhobos, the good kind of Killer GM excels at creating harsh, cruel, punishing, though not impossible, scenarios. If all the players just want to kill stuff and feel smart for avoiding traps and generally enacting badass death-defying stunts, the Killer GM can provide.
**'''Cons''' - Just as with the Comedian here above, players and GM must be on the same wavelength and accept that things can go utterly, awfully, hilariously [[just as planned|right]] or [[not as planned|wrong]] with little forewarning, sometimes on a single die roll. And the GM must be impartial, or even a little in the party favor if they make an honest mistake in the knife edge balance a killer game requires. A bad Killer GM is just a [[That Guy|massive twat]] with a huge hate-boner for you, your character, and everything you stand for. Hopefully not going as far to just kill you with no saves or warning, but the sort of GM to throw Lvl 20 monsters at a Lvl 1 party and then wonder why you didn't min-max enough to beat them. Like a Railroad GM, except the only destination is your frustrating, inexplicable death. Railroaders are also infamous for metamorphosing into Killer GM's in order to punish players who stray from there{{BLAM}}{{BLAM}}{{BLAM}} their story.
**'''Most likely campaign ending''' - [[TPK|Total Party Kill]] either by defiant, awesome last stand worthy of posting on /tg/, or getting so fucked over you wonder why you even bother playing these stupid games in the first place, which can also be worthy of posting on /tg/.
**'''Favored Games:''' - [[Hackmaster]], [[Castles & Crusades]], [[AD&D]], [[Only War]], [[Paranoia]], [[Call of Cthulhu]]. That's if they're up front about the sort of games they run. The worst Killer GMs will surprise you with an exceptionally hard form of a game that ''should'' be less death-prone, like [[FATE]] or [[Exalted]]

*'''/d/M''' - No way we could keep all the horrors of the /d/M on everything but it's own page, sanctioned and hermetically sealed, so its wrongness may never ever spill out into the world. Long story short: Go [[/d/M|here.]]
**'''Favored Games:''' - [[FATAL]] (of course), [[Maid RPG]], [[Black Tokyo]], [[Zettai Reido]], [[CthulhuTech]], and if you're unlucky, whatever game your group happens to be playing.

===DM Alignment===

There is also another potential way to categorize types of DMs, based on the [[Alignment]] system of D&D:

*'''Lawful''' DMs prefer to go by the book and look up a pertinent rule when in a situation they don't know the rule for.
*'''Chaotic''' DMs prefer to houserule things and use homebrew a lot.

*'''Good''' DMs are [[This Guy|having fun when the players are having fun]].
*'''Evil''' DMs are [[That Guy|having fun when the players are not]]

==See Also==
* [[Martini]]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgoW1at9bBg/ How to be a Dungeon Master - Game Mastering 101 by How to be a Great Game Master]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6OFdZ7BF2I/ 3 Ultimate Cheats for Any GM - Great GM by How to be a Great Game Master]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XikjjQok5Y&list=PL7atuZxmT9570U87GhK_20NcbxM43vkom How to GM playlist by Geek & Sundry, Matthew Mercer, Satine Phoenix, et al.]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL43rhEsU_g/ How to Dungeon Master - for Absolute Beginners (D&D5e) by Don't Stop Thinking]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFCzwiqlnCE/ DM 101 - Episode 1: The Basics (Dungeons & Dragons Help) by Sherlock Hulmes]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTD2RZz6mlo/ Your First Adventure, Running the Game #1 by Matthew Colville]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKGHS3ToBMQ/ How to be a Good DM by ProJared]

[[Category:Roleplaying]]

Adventurer

2023-05-23T02:21:57Z

2601:1C0:5001:5320:B5F3:D8BD:A6BC:B9A4: /* Murderhobos */

[[Category:Roleplaying]]
{{topquote|Maxim 1: Pillage, '''then''' burn.|The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries}}

'''Adventurer''' is a title given to individuals whose occupation is, obviously, adventuring. "Adventuring" implies going on adventures, but in practice is more likely to involve murder, security detail, object and artifact retrieval, tomb desecration, and waking things best left sleeping. Adventurers usually have short lifespans, but make up for it by wielding phenomenal cosmic power and carrying around enough material wealth to destabilize the economies of entire regions. Usually '''Adventurers''' are also [[Player Characters]]. The inverse is even more common.

Broadly speaking, an adventurer's job description will fit into two categories, with some overlap. Both involve killing things, but one is slightly more social than the other.

==Murderhobos==
[[Image:Murderhobo.jpg|right|thumb|300px|Little did they know this man was the richest in the kingdom.]]
:''You belong among the murderhobos</br>
:''You belong in a pile of corpses</br>
:''Run away from any roleplaying</br>
:''You belong in a hack and slash campaign''

'''Murderhobos''' is a term used (originally pejoratively, but occasionally affectionately) for the [[player character]]s in [[RPG]]s, both in [[video game]]s and tabletop games. The term arises due to the fact that most adventuring characters and [[party|parties]] are technically homeless vagrants, generally living on the road and sometimes in temporary accommodation, and the default solution to problems faced by the typical [[adventurer]] boils down to killing things until the problem is solved or treasure is acquired. In many games (especially older pure [[RIP AND TEAR|hack and slash]]-types of the type that [[Gary Gygax]] despised) killing things and taking their stuff is simply the order of the day, all [[Stupid Good|morally acceptable and proper]], either because that's all the players are interested in doing or all the [[GM]] can come up with. In more nuanced settings, "Murderhobo(s)" is used especially to refer to characters (or entire parties) of looser morals who tend to regard massive collateral damage as an inevitable and unremarkable consequence of their actions, or who are quite happy to slaughter otherwise friendly [[NPC]]s at slight provocation or the prospect of financial gain (thus often overlapping with [[munchkin]]s).

Although it is a fantasy standard that adventuring parties are welcomed into towns and villages and hailed as saviors (or at least obscenely rich individuals that are loose with money), there is a small trend for this to be inverted in some games and stories (usually for comedy's sake) and have the protagonists be treated as the homeless serial killers they actually are, either by having them rejected from civilized society or by having the NPCs/minor characters respond with pants-shitting fear whenever the heroes present themselves. Murderhobos left to their own devices are bad news for the region they occupy, so they are often dealt with by giving them quests that take them to dangerous places in distant locations, where they can kill some other monsters (or at least some foreigners).

One aspect of murderhobos that [[neckbeard]]s don't like to talk about much is that they were, and indeed still remain, largely a response to [[Old School Roleplaying]].

See, in the dim and dismal early days of RPGs, especially [[Dungeons & Dragons]], Roleplaying Games did not put much stock into, well, roleplaying. Gameplay was seen less as a form of collaborative story telling and more as a conflict between the DM and the players, something to be won. Remember old school D&D and it even older predecessor Chainmail spun out of table top wargames where there was a definitive loser and winner. Nevermind that such a conflict is inherently tilted in the DM's favor, since he can always [[Rocks fall, everyone dies|just drop rocks on all the players at any time he feels like]], making a "victory" by the DM not actually any accomplishment. This mindset was encouraged with competitive tournaments held at conventions to see who could complete a module in the shortest time and with the most gold and Experience Points. Most campaigns were just a series of dungeons crawls leading up to the final battle with the dragon on the twentieth floor, where the only NPCs were the enemies meant to be killed.

Even when the games moved out of the dungeons and into the wider world, some DMs kept this overly competitive mindset alive. The only difference between outside and inside was the size - everything and everyone was still part of Team "Destroy the PCs" and out for blood. That captured princess you just rescued? She's actually a [[Mimic|shapeshifting monster]] and eats you while your guard is down. Those merchants you brought gear and food from? Swindlers whose stock is non-functional at best, and at worst sabotaged so it'll break at the worst possible time. That otherwise apathetic level 1 Commoner you just passed by the street? They'll happily rat you out to the BBEG's minions for a couple copper coins because you dared breathe in their presence.

Having an actual backstory made this even worse, as it amounted to generously providing the DM a list of people who would instantly recognize you, know all your weaknesses and abuse both without hesitation. The rare few friendly NPCs who weren't faking it were just ways to attack the PCs indirectly: Got a little sibling who idolises you? Boom - they've been kidnapped by [[Ogre|Ogre]] [[Bandit|bandits]]; better save them before they get raped! Got a family or a sweetheart back home that you're adventuring to raise money for? Boom - they just got unceremoniously murdered off-screen by the [[BBEG]]'s [[Assassin|assassins]] to provide a cheap plot hook for an angsty revenge story! That [[Lamia child|Lamia child you rescued from an untenable situation to raise as your own?]] Boom - she's always been planning to slit your throat in your sleep, and now you have to kill your adopted daughter!

Hence, the development of the murderhobo: [[Munchkin|a character functionally hatched from an adventurer egg who shoots first, asks questions never, and doesn't give a damn about anything that doesn't fuel their progression of loot and EXP.]]

Murderhoboism is invariably a metagame effect. There are two general reasons as to why. First it can be a conscious decision by the player not to have attachments that a [[That Guy|bastard DM]] could exploit [[Railroading|to force a dramatic action]]. Secondly it could be a response of a player for whom the only interesting part of D&D is the combat, role playing and fluff? Nah they love crunch, mechanics and big numbers, they made a character with enough DPR to one shot a lich and by GOD there going to use it! These two different response to game play need two slightly different responses. To head the first one off the DM needs to make it clear to the players that such things won't happen (unless you're rolling psykers in [[Dark Heresy]]). It's up to you, Mr. DM, to design the story so the players have ample opportunity to stop harm from befalling their loved ones, and in turn you can get NPCs that act as quest givers and sources of aid and support.

The second type of player is more difficult to deal with as they fundamentally have a different form of engagement to your game then other players. That's not inherently a bad thing and countless groups have that one player who tends to be silent when there's not a puzzle or combat to be had. The problem is when they act out and let it harm the enjoyment of other players by murdohoboing when other players are engaged with the story and narrative. In this case you should talk to the player on the issue, but at the same time if they keep acting out: don't be shy to drop kick them out the group for everyone else's enjoyment. In general fighting murderhoboism is win-win for everyone, even players with slight murderhobo tendency.

Alternately [[Just As Planned|Or you could lean in to it.]] A hypothetical party of evil adventurers would probably default to some degree of murderhoboism and mercenary work without a longer term goal to direct there purpose toward, and to be fair some times be a cackling Skeletor villain with zero self awareness can be funny. Even so too much murderhoboism could also cause problems if the reaction to those murderhoboing is causes the players to stop having fun. Just be aware of the kind of game your trying to make and tailor the world,both in game and on a meta level, to what you expect will bring the most engagement to the players.

==Mercenaries==
[[image:Landsknechts.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Landsknechte; because Germans wanted to Pirate too but didn't have boats.]]
Mercenaries are people who fight in conflicts for the sake of direct profit provided by their employer. In most fiction, they exist to provide a group of people who have military force capacity, while not being associated with particular political and societal factions. This means that most mercenaries are used for protagonists and anti-heroes, as it's much easier to create a believable and unique character without restricting them to a set group of beliefs of a faction. Equally frequently, the mercenaries are shown in the dark light as well, being pragmatic villains who have little of interest in anything besides money, thus allowing them to be the bad guys by doing anything and everything evil for the sake of wealth.

The difference mercenaries have though is that they actually existed. However, real mercenaries tended to be amoral (often Swiss) pikemen who would serve as royal guards for monarchs too paranoid to trust their own people to not murder them. The ones that DID actually go and fight wars, they tended to be Germans and were often as not in it for [[Pirate|the looting]]. And if the other side offered them a better deal, they were almost always more than happy to betray their now-former employer. Some, such as Francesco Sforza, even ended up as prominent aristocrats themselves. Needless to say, the aforementioned unreliability is one of the reasons why modern nation-states use their own standing armies to fight wars now (with some exceptions, of course).

In many a game, the PCs are hired as mercenaries to provide services for someone, starting from removal of [[Giant_space_hamster|Giant Space Hamsters]] from the cellar of a local noble, to poisoning the king during a banquet so his brother's cousin's sister can usurp the throne. And, since parties can range from [[Chaotic Stupid]] to [[Stupid Evil]] to [[Stupid Good]] (even at the same time), all characters can act towards a common goal without having to resort to fratricide because they can't agree on an approach to the situation (as most players use their status as mercenaries as an excuse to do things out of character, because "[[Derp]], [[Games Workshop|Money]]").

==Adventuring as a Job==
Recently we've seen an influx of new settings where being an Adventurer is an actual, real job description. Often employed in an [[Adventurer's Guild]], this trope plays everything about the typical [[PC]] completely straight, but builds it into the setting as an accepted and regular part of life. Need to fix a house? Get a carpenter! Need a troll dead before he steals all your sheep? Get an adventurer!

Increasingly common in [[Isekai|medieval]] [[Anime|animu]], it does see some use in western settings as well (wild west gunslingers and pirates of the sea and space variety all fit the adventurer mold well). [[Order of the Stick]] has run with this since the very beginning, but since its a self-aware pastiche of RPGs in general, that's to be expected. Many a DM create similar worlds, since that completely circumvents the need to make a group of ''wildly'' different people of different creeds and races come together for realistic reasons. You can just say that they are adventurers for hire, and Bob's your uncle.

Ironically, despite being considered a modern anime invention, the adventurer's guild concept was used in one of the oldest [[Dungeons & Dragons]] settings, [[Mystara]], and played absolutely straight.

==Gallery==
<gallery>
Image:Adventurer_Eggs.png|Your character's childhood
</gallery>

==External Links==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2BIsZo_Xlc See here] for a man who fights like a murderous hobo.

[[Category: Roleplaying]]

Proud Warrior Race

2023-05-23T01:59:31Z

2601:1C0:5001:5320:B5F3:D8BD:A6BC:B9A4: /* Examples */

{{stub}}
The '''Proud Warrior Race''' is a fairly common archetype in speculative fiction for various civilizations and cultures, both sci-fi and fantasy. The basic idea is based (and this must be stressed, ''very loosely'') on a variety of IRL cultures like the Vikings, Sengoku era Japan, medieval Knights, Spartans, Mongols and certain Native American tribes such as the Apaches. In any case what they have in common is this...

* Placing extreme value on marshal prowess and master of combat techniques. One should dedicate one's life towards mastering combat.
** A veneration of heroic military figures, often by oral record. To join their ranks of the exalted heroes is often the end goal in a warrior's life.
** Position in this society is generally dictated by being the best fighter one way or another.
* A strong and strict code of honour outlines the life of a Warrior, especially in combat.
** An attitude towards death that's at the very least accepting and usually glorifies dying in Honorable combat. Often to the point that it's disgraceful to simply fade away in a hospital bed of old age, as opposed to falling in battle.
* A decentralized society with power divided over small tightly knit sub-groups (often familial) which often fight with each other for position.
* A societal reverence towards war at the expense of other aspects of their society (economic, commercial, scientific, cultural, etc).
* A tendency to try to shoehorn warrior stuff in every aspect of their culture.

It should be noted that the "Race" part, while often a thing here, is not essential as the trope also applies to a social caste. You can have variations on this in which heritage is easily trumped by commitment to the code. (Like, for instance, Star Wars' Mandalorians who accept(ed) anyone willing to live by the ''Resol'nare'' code.)
== Problems ==
There are a lot of issues with the Proud Warrior Race and how they function, but the stem of it is that any society is complex and reducing them to one part of that greater whole makes as much sense as designing a car and only designing an engine.

The first and most obvious point is that even in a Warrior Culture, someone needs to keep them fed, clothed, armed and armoured. To get their sword, a warrior gets a blacksmith to forge it. To do so, the blacksmith needs food, fuel, metal, and a forge to work them in. This requires peasants to feed them and supply them with coal and bog iron, as well as a mason to build their forge (who also needs to be fed, requiring even more peasants) and the peasants and mason will need metal tools, so you'd probably want another smith who'd make them who'd also need food, a tanner to make forge bellows for the smiths, a carpenter to build their houses, etc. In the end for every full time warrior, you need a bunch of other people behind them providing support.

Similarly, even in warlike cultures not everything was about war and fighting all the time. The Vikings and the Mongols were not only warriors, but skilled traders. The Samurai produced a lot of capable poets and artists who's work would as often be about flowers than battle and eventually they largely evolved into a class of Bureaucrats.

That said, a Warrior Culture can still exist and thrive in a pre-industrial context as they lord over civilian subjects and are not above doing some farming, herding, trade, accounting and landscape painting on the side themselves. A few elite warriors clad in the best armour with the best weapons, trained from childhood to use them and willing to press on even when death seems certain can best several times their number of peasants with cheap spears and helmets and minimal training that are liable to panic if things don't go their way. The most obvious and extreme example of this in history are the Spartans. The Spartans (i.e. offcially recognized full citizens of the city of Sparta) themselves did all the Proud Warrior Race guy stuff training, Spartan way extreme training, fighting and so on and so on. But they were supported by an entire social class of slaves, the Helots. Said Helots were conquered at some point in history (we think this was over 2,000 years ago), and were kept in slavery to do all the support work the Spartans required for their Proud Warrior stuff. But due to them being slaves, the Spartans had to spend a lot of time and energy keeping them in line. Nevertheless, it was effective for a few hundred years roughly between 900BC and 200BC: Sparta's power and influence would only wane away by the time Alexander the Great came conquering along and ultimately be definitively put under by the Romans.

The problem is that as societies and technology advance, this model gets less and less viable. When a nation has access to both firearms and cannons as well as the apparatuses of state to recruit the sons of peasants, artisans, clerks, etc... in the tens of thousands and train, drill and organize them into a professional army; said army can overcome mighty warriors trough tactics and/or sheer numbers, even if the opposition has a substantial advantage in one-on-one fights. Do note that it is a lot easier said then done: historically, only the Roman Empire and maybe China could really claim to have been able to do that until arguably the 16th century. In a fantasy setting, the Proud Warrior Race Guy can perfectly make sense make sense: one could say the romanticized version of a [[knight]] is a form of Proud Warrior Race Guy. It's when you start getting into the vast industrial complexes of science fiction that this can strain suspension of disbelief without some additional thought put into it the way the T'au do for example.

Another problem is the "Proud" part of "Proud Warrior Race Guy". Codes of Honour are not a bad thing in of themselves, after all they can provide stability and encourage people to do their best and push their boundaries. The problem is that the Honour systems the Proud Warrior Races usually are more concerned with glorifying an individual. They'd often avoid weapons and tactics they deem "cowardly", which a pragmatic and opportunistic enemy will identify and exploit. There are of course various degrees this could be portrayed: a modern real-world military like the US Marines could be said to have a code of honour. '''Not shooting medics''' and '''Not harming non-combatants''' and '''Not using chemical weapons/sub-munitions/etc...''' make for a reasonable code, as they limit collateral damage and casualties without hampering the combatants ([[skub|too much]]). In fiction, however, it get taken to stupid levels like '''No ambushing, head straight for the enemy!''' or '''Ranged weapons are a coward's tool!''': such codes are so inherently self-limiting that you wonder how they're able to manage to be successful warriors in the first place.

Overall in both fiction and IRL: the Proud Warrior Race guys tend to eventually lose to those societies that are better able to mobilize larger parts of their population than the small, more elite Proud Warriors. More so when firearms are involved.

== Examples ==
* Green Martians in John Carter of Mars
* Klingons in [[Star Trek]] - probably the most well known incarnation.
* Sontarans in [[Doctor Who]] are a rare exception to the rule, as their militaristic traditions are shown in a negative (or humorous) light rather than positive or at least neutral.
* Sangheili in [[Halo]]
* [[The Clans]] in BattleTech
* [[Orc]]s often fall into this trope.
** Same can often be said for the [[Dark Elves]].
* Saiyans in Dragonball
* Mandalorians in [[Star Wars]] sort of straddle the line between race and creed, but either way they only focus on warfare and making weapons for warfare.
* The [[Tau]] [[Fire Caste]]. While often not thought of that way, the Tau Fire Caste are the proud warrior "race" or maybe sub-species of the Tau Empire with even subtle eugenic pressures to ensure that the best Fire Warriors have children who themselves will become Fire Warriors. They are of course supported by other castes of Tau which solves the various logistical issues a Proud Warrior race may have.
* Turians from Mass Effect. The Turians an interesting case in that there 'proud warrior race guy' trope is manifested as a strong and legally mandated tradition of public service, which is often done through the army which does more then just fight and covers police forces, fire fighters, engineers and even civilian shipping via a merchant marine force. It does also mean that like a more stereotyped proud warrior race, every single Turian can if pressed join the armed forces and fight to the last and they openly practice Total War rather then doing anything in a limited fashion. Overall if your on the receiving end of a Turian war it probably look a lot like a Klingon or most other Proud Warrior Race Guys with the entire society mobilizing to kick your ass, but unlike other proud warrior race guy's there not actually looking for somebody to fight at all times.

*[[Spartans]] from [[Halo]] are a UNSC military program meant to design a new race of humans but while the spartan 1 program [[fail|flopped]] the spartan 2 program known originally as the ORION project generation II, was the most effective part of the SPARTAN program, an effort to produce elite soldiers through mechanical and biological augmentation. [[grimdark|The spartan 2 test subjects were kidnapped children so their mentality would be separate from mainstream humanity as social connections like family and nation were replaced with the UNSC]]. Even though they were originally meant to crush separatist rebellions they served as the defense of humanity against the [[covenant]].The [[astartes|subsequent generations of spartan programs would be more humanitarian in their treatment of test subjects]] causing them to be of lesser quality than their [[custodes|spartan 2 counterparts]]. At the same time the Spartans also show the problems with the Proud Warrior Race Guy trope: namely that humanity even with it's super soldiers was losing and losing badly. Sure Spartans were a hella force modifier in there local area but they could not be everywhere and overall the UNSC was losing ground until the [[DM|universe]] threw them a bone and the events of the Halo games played out where a single super solider could have an outsized impact enough to change the war.