*Thanks for watching!* Did I forget any of the player types in D&D and other roleplaying games? Let me know in the comments below! Take a look at the brand new Portrait Works app! It's the ultimate tool that gives you any portrait you need for your game! Find them here: www.portrait.works/ Find each chapter easily by clicking on the timestamps in the description.
Hm, I don't think any of these types of players exist in pure form. Every player combines two or three of these aspects. Fortunately, I've never experienced a killer. I'm more familiar with the butt-kicker who enjoys fighting. Then I know the specialist, who is usually infatuated with a particular class and wants to become a master of this profession. What I missed most was the tactician - because that's what I am to a large extent myself. I have a lot of fun overcoming complex obstacles as cleverly and elegantly as possible.
I really didn’t hear you cover great players, explorer’s was about the best players you’ve meet? What about players who actually care about the game/story/each other characters/team players?
A player type I call "The Detective", is always looking for clues and deeper meaning in every encounter, setting or utterance (by players and/or NPC's), often to the point of seeing plots or intrigue that the GM hadn't intended. Some GM's I know will sometimes alter their original story if they like the theory that player has come up with. Possibly a variant of "The Storyteller".
I think that might be what category I fall into, though maybe not so obsessively. But yeah, I think I do have a tendency to think about if the specific enemies we encounter or other details might reflect on the plot and generally what's going on.
Another branch category of this, I think, is “the Theorist.” These are the ones who, like the Detective, seek a something deeper than the surface level story. The difference is that they are more prone to taking the world itself into deeper levels, often far deeper than what the GM ever intended. They are the ones who connect dots, try to pull all the strings of each and every story line, event, and interaction, no matter where, and bring them all together as if it were one HUGE world puzzle! I think there are good and bad sides to this. The good is that I tend to find these people, however outlandish, to be heavily inspiring, since they have these huge ideas. The bad is that they often prove very distracting, trying to pull everyone else at the table, including the GM onto their own boat. Unfortunately, oftentimes with GMs, the story and world building are largely surface level, and the fact that the Theorist even thought to go deeper means they are taking this 10xs more levels deeper than what the GM ever considered doing! Lol
As a GM, I like to rely on it. Make a bit of a sandbox world with just random 'toys' for the players to play around with, and maybe a draft of a larger story, villains and stuff happening in the world... and then when players start talking about what they think is actually happening, what they think is important and relevant... I may take those things and make them relevant and turn them into the main story. For example, I might have started with the idea of there being a BBEG who acts from the shadows and no one is yet aware of his scheming. But the players started suspecting a well-known evil warlock from a neighboring land, so I ditched the not-yet-revealed BBEG for the one that actually had some established history and connections already known to the players. And over time, we even made the warlock intertwined with the backstories of the PCs so for some it became a personal revenge, for others a quest of self discovery, and generally I liked the idea much more than my initial plan. So, since the story should focus on players, I like the idea of having my own plans and ideas only as a stop-gap until I find out what the players actually care about, at which point they drive the story forward with their ideas.
I have several and together they can so,e times follow threads that aren’t there. They like to collect everything like it’s a video game. However they are really valuable and ensure plots progress. As long as there is balance it’s wonderful.
I miss the one trick pony: the player who doesn't care about the system or the world. The character they play is always the same. I know a player who always plays mercenary type character. Its a rather rare type who cares not a lot about what the other players want or what the dm does as long as he can be the one thing he likes to be.
there is an overlap here that I've seen many times. I've seen it go hand in hand with toxic play styles a lot. the person who always wants to be the thief that steals things from the other players and acts as obstacle rather than a link. I've dealt with more than I'd like, and most of the players I've seen get tired of this person rather quickly.
Reminds me of one of my players that chose proficiency in calligraphers tools and some of the PCs were upset because it’s a useless tool but he made sure to use it every chance he could like when they would split ip he would always write a note and leave it on the door and me as the DM I would always narrate how beautifully written it was
I feel there are also subtypes here. I usually use active and reactive players. While it is possible for any that you have discussed here to be active or reactive, I think know what you have will help your game. Active Players will poke a prod. They will interact with the world and surroundings of their own accord with and without prompts. They want to know the details and descriptions so they can fiddle with them, and play around in the shared world. Reactive Players will only interact or become engaged with the world in reactive to an event or a prompt. They are unlikely to find their own adventure or motivation and will often just idle until given something to bounce off. Knowing which type of these two you have can often help the DM set pacing and aid with getting the characters involved
I'm DMing a game for a group of friends, and I have been for about 4-5 months now. I love them all, but unfortunately they are all reactive players. I want to put in the effort to make an awesome and interesting campaign, but they don't interact with the world of their own accord. I've nearly lost all of my motivation to DM for them because they mostly just sit there and turn the pages, and I'm not sure how to bring this up with them.
@drinkablebean honestly, with your group, I would just do a low effort railroad adventure that is just fun. I understand your woes, though. I usually get stuck with reactive players. I would love to tell a grand story with intrigue and motivations, but in my experience, it just isn't possible with a reactive group. Most of the time, reactive players tend to be the ones who are just in it for some company and some fun. They aren't interested in psychological character growth or the emotional/mental consequences of the stuff they have seen. However; it is an opportunity to do weird stuff that usually won't fly in games with more ambitious and involved players. Take this as an opportunity to let the wheels fall off and embrace chaos maybe? This is assuming your reactive players are also the type that would enjoy this stuff. If not, I have no advice. Have them abducted by a hill giant who wants to keep them as pets. The weird social outcast hill giant could try to dress them up and play with them the way some people do with their tiny dogs. Not abuse, but the adventure becomes how do we get out of this without getting killed by a giant. Combat may be out of the question entirely. The giant isn't cruel, but certainly wouldn't let them go on adventures or do dangerous stuff. They may even enjoy and entertain the weird life for a few sessions. Thrust a situation upon them in which they inherit or otherwise become the proprietors of a tavern for what could be an endless stream of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia adventures. Also the OSR adventure Barkeep on the Borderlands comes to mind. It is an epic bar crawl adventure. Anyway, whatever happens I hope ot all works out and you are able to have fun as well, because running a game and not enjoying the game you run is just a job without pay
The tacticians… maybe a power gamer variant, but it’s less about optimizing character and more about optimizing encounters. They can come up with clever ideas, but can also contribute to analysis paralysis or spend an entire hour coming up with the most convoluted way to take out three guards without making a sound. They also tend to overthink grid movement to avoid attacks of opportunity or rounds without attacking at all cost.
The team player. The one that wants everyone to have their spot in the limelight so the group, as a whole, is elevated. Often takes an opportunity to ask another player character "Oh, you know about this. What do you think?"
May we all strive to be that player! I am definitely an actor/storyteller type and I have been trying to remain cognizant of not stealing the show but using that innate desire to perform as a tool to put the spotlight on others! Helping the other players feel comfortable to get into the story/character from whatever angle they seem interested in. -Dan -Dan
I think it's all a matter of degrees, every single one of these can be negative when taken to either extreme. Inverting even the ones that were played here as complete negatives can be problematic. The Anti-killer can be a drag on your party too (The pure pacifist cleric who never wants to kill anything and will actively try to stop the party from getting in fights is pretty frustrating to game with if you're playing a character whose primary purpose in life is glory in battle). The Anti-socialite is that player who ignores you when you talk to them by their real name, because "Who is Kevin? I am Itarian D'welienmar Gowaine, I know not whom this Kevin is" which can be kind of annoying when you came out here not just to play a game but to hang out with your actual friends, not their characters. There's a lot of value in being able to read your table as a player and figure out what sort of behavior is acceptable and what might be disruptive.
Definitely a mix of actor/storyteller and a little bit of power gamer in there Look I lover immersion and good stories and I took theater classes, so yeah lmao
What I'm missing is an idea how to make the different types come together... if possible at all. You will probably not get a Killer to work out well with a Storyteller or a Planner/Puppeteer (did I miss that one? The one that tries to "solve" the game by planning it completely from start to finish, telling everyone what they MUST do?) to work with a Joker (in the Heath Ledger style, someone who just "does things"), but others can work well together if you plan the story for that. Powergamers will gladly follow a Planner's plan to get more loot out of it, Killers will gladly provide the front line fighting force for their plan and so on. Could you maybe put a bit more emphasis on the wants and goals of the different player types and how to get them to come together?
You forgot about the "harmonic center" which is a player that hears or gleans onto that one, or second particular detail about your game that they find a way in-game to have their character be some type of active force as a catalyst that finds a way to be some form of answer to almost any problem that the other players characters "might" benefit from because of that "piece of information" that got their creative juices churning to begin with to the potential detriment of the game.
I've found that assigning rules lawyers to look things up for you during the game makes them shut up more. This gets easier to do the longer the campaign is running. You can also turn their annoying habbit around by having them help other players accomplish something they want sooner
A variant of the explorer might be the "I follow" Going down the table, whenever you might ask what they're doing when going into town, they just say "I follow". They say that they're enjoying something, and they may make a neat concept, but it just acquiesces into a follower of the party.
A bit of a rant: Im gonna confess and say that I can be a toxic player. Would like to have som input. When I played the most we were a group playing once every week for a couple of hours per session. Im think I am classified as a joker mixed with a socialite. I liked to hang and chill with my friends. I was very much the "what does this butto do" and caused a bit of mayhem from time to time by being possessed or trying to seduce a main npc, or any npc. Since I have adhd I would have a problem just sitting and listening for an 1hour or so while one of the party did something and would then concoct a plan that I thought was cool. How can I be more accomodating to other players and the DM. I want to roleplay more but always feel like I make a fool of myself. Thanks 😀
Oof the killers are super annoying. I'm lucky that my players are not those types. But the best way I managed to keep them in line was to make it clear that attacking BBEG at first sight was going to result in horrible death and probably torture. (The villain had about a dozen henchmen and an ogre body guard right there) If they can't get the message after that, there is no helping them without a hard lesson 😬
A good game has balanced players. Levity tempered with solemnity. Competitiveness integrated into their sense of cooperation. Self-awareness with a bit of empathy.
Power gamers can be annoying if they are gimmicky, but man, winners are the worst in my experience. I hate DMing for people trying so hard to win the game they make it unfun for everyone at the table.
The Actor normally sucks. They are rarely good "actors" and take over the game and you need to have people who don't care about playing. Has never worked with my games as they are more focused on the adventure
Gotta admit, I getting really sick of the Jokers as a DM. I love humor, don't get me wrong, but it seems like every Joker just designs the character that IS the joke, rather than the character who TELLS the jokes, and it's always pretty much the same joke every time: HA HA, look how silly my character is.
The Instigator: I think this was in an earlier version of this video, couple years ago… the Instigator plays well with others right up until there’s a decision to be made, if the party is deciding on a course of action that is not the most excited story/version of events, they’ll have their PC shoot at the god, or move the rock, or touch the sleeping mound of fur just to see what happens, if they or any other PC gets hurt or killed it was worth it cause the story is better now that we did something rather than nothing… and “nothing” was retreating from the bigger bad guy that showed up or sneak around the exciting thing the party was trying to avoid.
Similar to the one I just posted, "The Detective", always looking for clues and deeper meaning in every encounter, setting or utterance (by players and/or NPC's), etc.
This might be a subtype of the joker. As a person with an immersed/serious playstyle, I detest this subtype. I like funny worlds, but not "senseless" ones. Though that is probably just personal preference. XianHu's detective seems more like an explorer-storyteller mix, even though the curiosity and the sometimes literal poking around are shared with the instigator.
@@kiram.3619 similar, but no…not really. My play style is not that of a Joker, unless it’s a campaign of jokers…(because when I DM I want players to) I try to align my head cannon with what the GM is going for, you got a Viking Game, I’ll research Vikings come up w/ a viking character, etc…. However when we beat what we think is the BBEG, and they get resurrected by their boss, and my party wants to just run away.. I’ll fire a shot just because for me as a player it’s a better story (better= a story with more interesting occurrences)… did I get hit with Feeble Mind and be at an INT and CHA of 3 till party could find a healer? yes. Was that funny? Wry much so. Was that more interesting than the alternative? Hell yeah-we found who she/boss is and where she’s from what she can do, also lead to discovering a famous in game tavern full of shadow dancing thieves guild so that we could prestige class? Why Yes, thank you for asking. Have no idea what the story would be if I did what party wanted, back out, no info, no leads, just scared, no tavern with excellent pies and thieves.
The assistant. We make sure the party doesn't fall into analysis paralysis. We make sure party members don't forget their buffs ( or the dm forgets monster buffs). We tug at other peoples comments about their characters to help draw them out. We're probably normally a DM and want to make sure everything moves as fluidly as possible for everyone so we can keep playing.
Thats what I want to be, but I'm often a joker. I'm aware of it and I avoid to disrupt the game by asking myself, if my joke can be made in character. If not, I won't make it. Doesn't work always tho', but I'm working on it.
Yep, that's me. In our online games it's often me who keeps the track of all our equipment and quests' progress while also keeping in mind the main plot and helping our DM to explain some game mechanics he didn't expect the players would ask him. I normally would be just a DM but my schedule is overloaded and chaotic af so I just can't spend time on organizing my own games(
I ran a campaign for a group of new players, going on close to a year now. It was designed to be a 'classic' fantasy kind of game, with an epic escalation in a LotR/Narnia sort of way. About 3 months ago, we all slowly came to the realization that they were all, more or less, Explorer style PCs. The transition to higher-level play, where they have so many powers to affect the narrative, was not so fun. So we're starting over, as the campaign narrative I was building up was not comfortable for players who didn't like to drive the narrative. It's good to see that Player type validated here. It was nobody's fault, as they were discovering themselves as they were discovering the game, and I wish I had better foresight. Siné.
The Pollyanna. For this player the heroic ideal is tied up in making everybody's life better. Everybody's. They'll talk to every single NPC (for them there are no extras in a scene) and try to find out about their lives & ambitions. When not controlled they can slow the game to a crawl, but otherwise they're great for encouraging roleplay & interaction with the setting. They tend to make good hearted PCs that come up with ways of dealing with encounters without combat. Just have a list of names ready for all those background NPCs. You'll need it. 😉
@Dragonfan You carry on being you, you hyper compassionate wonder, you! It's the GM's job to set some limits to keep the game moving. There's no need for you to become callously goal focused. Don't you dare change!
@@dragonfan8647 if you pop into a new game it can be a helpful tip to a gm that "um ah hey Im this type of player.... You will likely need x while I'm here"
Precious Killer combo, “I take everything I want, we do what ever I want and if another player does not like then I kill their character,” has to be the worst! If I ever get a sniff of one I will have conversation before removing them from the game.
Killers would do well in zombie apocalypse survival scenarios where they're supposed to kill everything. Just don't give them companion NPC's unless you make those extremely easy to resurrect (Like in the game Magicka, where team killing is part of the game play).
Can confirm from experience running zombie games. For added flavor, have them play themselves in the real world. They trick themselves into being invested real quick.
One of my nephews earned the nickname Captain Chaos. He is very much "the joker" in your taxonomy. He isn't trying to win. He isn't trying to make anyone else lose. He's just trying to have fun by doing something he finds interesting or amusing. From the perspective of the other players (whether playing an RPG or a board game), he tends to introduce a chaotic, unpredictable element to any game he plays.
As always when categorising personality traits: you are never one but a mix of a bunch. Also changing with the daily mood, the group and the character one is playing.
Yeah, definitely! I know I'm a bit of a joker in real life so that does affect my characters. However, I will never try to break the story just for the sake of fun. Just love to bring those lil funny moments to make the group feel loose a bit before getting devoured by a giant killing dragon :x
The Leader - The person who in the party ensures that everyone is heard from and actively cuts off their fellow party members if they are interrupting someone else. It's a great player to have at the table. They'll often lead without thinking they're a leader because they instinctively want everyone to take part. It's an incredible personality type but rather rarified.
@@uldirone4724 genuinely it can happen in a party too. I've even started looking out for it and when I see it getting NPCs to grant the party a title of some kind that names that player the representative of the group. Like I said, it's rare but it's really cool to see.
I think the interesting thing is that these types are not mutually exclusive. The longer you play the game, the more I find hybrid types, or people who roll in and out of types depending on the content of the game, or the people they play with. For instance, a Socialite who sorta becomes an explorer while they are playing, but doesn't really show how excited they are about it until questioned later. Or a powergamer who builds a crazy character and then throws optimization out the window at the table because they are more of a storyteller and don't care what happens to their characters. That sorta thing.
Yeah, I tend toward that last thing. Character concept is a big deal for me, but the *concepts* aren't always optimal. Like one of my characters is a thrown weapons specialist in 3.5 D&D, a game known for not supporting that character type well. But it was part of a storytelling character concept I liked, and I try to optimize as much as possible *within the boundaries of that concept*.
Just in time! after 6 years as a DM studying your channel, I have managed to get a break and become a player. now I can use more knowledge of a different type and be the best player for my group
Fun how some Player Types are also DM Types, and some really jive with each other like stated. It's fun when your DM is the Adversarial type and all players are Power Gamers. As a reverse Power Gamer (or Gimp as I like to call it), I play well with those Author type DMs who want to share a story so much that every encounter is really easy. Also, this sounds like horoscope if you think about it :]] Im a Gimp Rising, Joker Moon, and Actor Sun.
Yes, my current group has 2 storytellers who alternate which one wants to GM, with the other typically becoming the party leader. It works very well for us.
Yeah, a power gamer DM is quite something: They play to "win" so they think nothing of throwing an ancient red dragon at a level 1 party, because "it's in the monster manual".
Best campaigns i have been a part of, all actors and jokers, literally was invited by a friend in theatre class, and another having 2 dedicated storytellers, I tend to think what my character can do to add fun to the world as I dont play lots of serious characters but all my characters are capable of being serious, and there being a few good role players and a comedic relief made for good times!
Tip to new DMs. the fewer players you have in your game, the better the odds you will get a good combo of types. traditionally you want 4 to 6. I say shoot for 2. adjust your encounters for their action economy and you will get a good game out of them. side note: I ran a game with 11 players once, it was a disaster.
In my experience two is too few. A lot of the best bits in RPGs are driven by interactions between players, two is a difficult number to DM for because there just aren't enough of those interactions. I'd say 3-4 is the sweet spot.
@@jbaidley my favorite number of players is 3: 3 is enough for the characters to have enough breadth that they can handle a wide variety of situations, but not so many that you risk unintentional overlap. 3 is enough that you never have a 2 way tie in decision making, but not so many that decision making conversations get bogged down by player numbers. The only problem with 3 is that if someone is missing you can't really play, which is where I think 4 has an advantage (since with scheduling these days, 4 might turn out to be 3 more often than not) On the 11 player game: yeah that's not gonna be good. I tried the great idea of playtesting a game I was writing once with 16 players. Teenage me was not wise
@@jbaidley Ye, I would agree to this. It could depend a little bit on the experience of the players, but in general for me its far more pleasurable to have 3 or 4 players. Biggest point for this is, as mentioned, much player interaction with nearly no more effort for me.
My first dnd experience was about 8 or 9 people, grew to 11. DM hadn't played in 20 years, everyone else except for one person was either brand new or very very inexperienced to D&D. Nightmare game, I'm shocked I ever continued playing D&D.
When I first started about 8 years, it was at my public library and it was open to EVERYONE. The librarians clearly didn't understand that there were limits to the game. There was a point where we had like 23 people in a group with one DM. Not to mention we were playing 4th edition at the time. One round of combat would literally take 1-2 hours out of the 2.5 hours we would have to play. It also didn't help that people would just show up for 1-3 sessions and then never show up again and/or show up 2 hours late into a session. It was a horrendous experience.
The supportive significant other: the person at the table who really doesn't even want to be there but is only playing because they want to be supportive to their significant other.
Depends on the type of game you want to play. Recently I got a Joker to my narrative driven horror-ampaign and I'm already considering kicking him out of it after only two sessions. As a person he's a nice guy, but as a player he just doesn't get that I'm trying to create an atmosphere in my game and he's completely ruining it for me and my other, much more story-oriented players with his clowning. I would love to have this guy in a not-so-serious campaign, but not when I'm trying to run atmospheric and story-focused horror.
@@Dule810 I did, yes. Even before he joined the campaign I told him "Look, I know you're a joker as a player, but this is a serious campaign, you can't play your typical rediculous bard here. Do you really want to join?" He told me that he'd be able to play serious, too. But seems he isn't. I'm not saying that humor has absolutely no place in horror - it has, of course, but at the right time and place. This guy on the other hand just acts as redicously with his "serious" character as I got to know him in way more fun-oriented campaigns (where it was actually quite nice to play with him). He's not a bad person or even a bad player. He's just not the type of player for this particular type of game.
I really enjoyed this video. I’ve always described myself as someone who wants to advance the main plot or achieve things. Now I think I’d describe myself a explorer or story teller/escapist. I’m okay if someone else drives the story but it gets annoying to me as a player when the other players spend 3 hours arguing or shooting home made explosives with arrows trying to weaponize them.
There is a type of player that I missed in your ranks. The substitutioner - That player substitutes his real life with the game live. He is not an escapist, because he does not want to escape his life, he feels he has no life. To him, the reality is but a dream and only the gameworld is the real world. I have known a couple of those. They had no problems enhancing the GM's descriptions in their mind, asking questions, they explore, they have fun and joking around etc. thus they made the world fantastically real for all other players as well. They are not actors because there is no need to act! They consider dying, making a new character as being part of the game world's cycle of life. Just sooner or later you notice that they have this problem, they lose themselves but while the escapist loses himself for fun and a short time, the substitutioner never wants to end a session, they dislike the end of a campaign, they do not want to leave the fantasy behind at any cost. As I said above I know a few of those and like to play with them very much AS LONG as the problem does not become serious. There is a fine line for those players, a line that, when crossed they find themselves in need of therapy.
If a players knew what all their skills/abilities do without asking and have accurately kept track of their stuff I would probably let people get away with a lot more frowned upon behavior lol.
I don't care which of these types shows at my game so long as they are willing to talk and compromise and not insist that they get to play however they want
The one that bugs me the most is the Joker. I play for a bit of escapism, acting, and storytelling, and Jokers just mess around. I do agree that an entire table of Jokers can work though, and is quite fun to watch.
The worst thing about powergamers is that it forces the DM to balance the encounters around them, especially so with less experienced DMs who dont fully understand how to cater encounters for different skill sets. Then everyone else is forced to either powergame as well (which many people find not fun) or sit and watch as the powergamer does everything and try not to die.
Your British-California Valley Girl-Socialite accent had me laughing the rest of the video. My Curse of Strahd group has some power gamers, a couple of escapists, and EVERYONE is a joker. Nearly every session, they have me doubled over on the table laughing so hard that I can hardly breathe. We all know CoS is supposed to be gothic horror, but after a few sessions of trying gamely to keep the horror atmosphere and losing it while doubled over on the table laughing, I finally ditched trying to keep the horror atmosphere and ran it as heroic fantasy instead. We all were a lot happier that way, and two years later, we’re still going strong, and Count Strahd will die in a few more months in an epic, heroic battle. Usually, the party adapted to the tone I set as DM (always by choice; forcing it doesn’t work). This time, the DM had to adapt to the party. Another player type for you: the boyfriend/girlfriend. This player is there simply because the boy- or girlfriend is. They’re not really engaged in the game. They almost always leave if the relationship breaks up. Sometimes they turn into one of the other player types, and when that happens, they engage with the game and players a lot more. A lot of the time, however, they just coast along through the sessions.
I would probably be classified as a bit of a "Chameleon" - while out of the ones listed, I guess I would lean towards "explorer" personally - I'll be an actor with other actors, a storyteller with other storytellers, or a power gamer with other power gamers... with the reason I lean towards "explorer" being, I'm not a fan of being the party face or leader, since I have to play the "face" irl way too many hours of the day, every other aspect of the explorer is mutable for me though.
Hell, in different campaigns, I've BEEN all of these 😂 I tend to go more either explorer, power gamer (I try and tone down to not ruin the fun for anyone), or the storyteller
I am a bit of a mix I think between Escapist and Explorer. Before you got to Explorer I had a lot of thoughts about how you labeled the escapist. I care deeply about the world you would create, the politics and intrigue, lore, as long as those things bring me out of the real world and into a fantasy world. When a medieval styled fantasy world brings me back into modern day issues, and concepts, that will often takes me out of the fantasy and into the world I am trying to escape from. But as long as it feels more fictional, harder to find real world issues expressed I will go very deep, explore the world and get a lot out it. There is a bit of a balance to be had as some modern day issues can bleed through in a subtle way and still work, but when it becomes too real world inspired, with on the nose allegorical references that is where I will get bored, and not care much about the fantasy world any more.
Thanks for the list, you made me realise how i am The Storyteller who takes feats and class features for more Backstory reasons, while rest of my party is Power gamers just killing everything in one round and making us all immortal with overpower healing. Then i feel like i am playing alone as some recognized person interacting with NPCs, while rest of my party just Significcally reduces the Difficulty of the game in very annoying way.
I combine both, especially with how people are trying to play with feats at lv1 across the board now from backgrounds. Let me be strong yet interesting
@@ExeErdna i respect that. It's way better if i can talk with strong player like you, instead of one friend of mine who made a build to get insane high perception bonus And rolls twice due to companion, yet cannot even think of backstory about anything related to his character nor that companion at all.
I feel like 'Scapegoat' would be somewhere in their nickname. It's not THEM being an asshole in a fictional scenario because they think it's therefore acceptable/easy to get away with, it's how their CHARACTER would behave! It'd be almost believable if they didn't then go out of their way to create an asshole character for every single game.
It's interesting to think of the combined types. For instance the actor or storyteller mixed with the joker doesn't want to break the world. They exaggerate the humour within the world (Sam Reigel from Critical Role). But a joker mixed with killer doesn't just kill everyone to dominate the world. They target the NPCs the DM and characters care most about to troll them (or steal the items they care about. I count a thief as pretty much equivalent to a killer because they still target innocent NPCs for negative results). Or a precious storyteller DM who gets upset the players are playing their story wrong.
I found a MARVELOUS way to deal with Killers. Give them a warning about being stab happy, if they persist just kill their character. No explanation of WHAT killed them, no saves they just drop dead. In one instance i had killer PCs hands explode before his head exploded.
I love all How To Be A Great GM videos! Guy's extremely entertaining & I can't wait every Friday to see his Duskmourne Chroncles game! It's like watching episodes of "Absolutely Fabulous!" *only old timers will get that reference.* But guy knows what I'm referring to! Cheers Guy!
A hobo is just someone who wanders from place to place taking odd jobs. That's what most adventurers are. But these people wander from place to place doing that...but also killing things and often murdering everyone who even kind of gets in their way. That's the only implication. If the implication were that hobos kill people, they would just call this type 'hobos'.
There are only 2 main categories for DnD players really, and then, (more like the video presented) there are sub-categories from there. I (personally) don't over-complicate it or break it down any further than what is needed, and stick to the main 2 categories. (Not that it really matters, but... I've been playing since 1976, so there's my DnD creds for what's it's worth, which is nothing.) You are either (for the most part) going to be a selfish or selfless player. SELFISH PLAYERS: ...can't wait to level up, (again and again) and need to know what's going on in the story, but only care how it affects their character. Selfish players are reward driven and they need to be rewarded as the highest in the group. When someone else, (especially by dumb luck) finds the "big treasure chest" of gold, +2 sword, and spell scrolls, they are brooding mad and envious of that player the rest of the night AND campaign! They MUST be the one who investigates every desk, chest, drawer, cabinet, armoire, whatever... FIRST! Though not etched in stone, or exclusively, most selfish, reward-driven characters like to play Warlocks, Barbarians, Bards, Rogues, and braggadocios-type characters. If Alignment is used in the game, they ALWAYS choose CN, because they believe it's the alignment that lets them do whatever they want, whenever they want. They also LOVE to min/max optimize, and question and scoff at players as fools who don't. These players tend to get bored when conflict and combat isn't happening, and tend to be highly disruptive at those times, especially in RP, NPC, or DM scene set-up times. They (in literal schadenfreude) enjoy derailing campaigns and sabotaging other players, especially when they don't get their way, or their plan used. Only their character, their brilliant ideas, rolling their dice all night, and their stage-time matters to them. However, in contrast... SELFLESS PLAYERS: ...Like to level up, but they do so in think along the lines of: "How should I level up to help our team?" They can't wait to contribute more to the foundation of the story for the collaborative group efforts the DM laid down. They are team result-driven, and ensure all players are equally rewarded and included, regardless of who found what. They will engage and encourage the shyer players, to make sure they also have a chance to shine. They (generally) initiate conversations and group RPing discussions, but germane to the story, and rarely to never digress away from the story. They like to play Paladins, Clerics, Wizards, and Druids, and include flaws in their characters and generally LG or CG in Alignment. The selfless player has suggestions on how to proceed in any given situation, but wants to hear other player's thoughts too, and proceeds by popular vote. They also, to assist the DM, make sure players stay on track, and get back on track when they stray too far from the story or goal at hand.
Has the D&D community on YT put together "THE ULTIMATE SESSION ZERO CHECKLIST!"? (Sorry, I figure anything Ultimate should be in a booming voice) Do any of the VTT's let you search for group by player type? Do any of them offer suggestions on how to be a better player? Or how you can help the GM and the group?
I feel like you missed the scientist. A varriant of the power gamer, who wised up after building a few very powerful characters. And started running challenges for themselves. They enjoy exploring unused spells or coming up with uses for items that are unusual. ..... Or being an artificer and working with the dm to plumb the depths to which they can craft in the world. New items. New spells. Vehicles that do strange and wonderis things. Exotic abilities on weapons. Strange constructs. Essentially a power gamer/ story teller with a very creative bent. Who if not carefully managed can break the game..... But will always when having fun bend the world in insane directions.
* Precious story teller:" Crawford told me in that one video that d&d is about telling -your- story, why do you keep shutting down -my- story /npcs/etc & making changes to it? * Precious winner:"I'm a -RROOLLLEE- player and expect the world to adjust to fit the carefully crafted backstory that serves no other purpose but to justify why my coffeelock (or whatever) is so awesome & shouldn't be treated like a dirty R-O-L-L roll player so will be expecting concessions for all of this awesome"
Ugh the winner/killer reminds me of one person in the group I play with he still brings up that one time he managed to do 10 damage in a turn (with a gun that he definitely didn't consult the DM about) which just so happened to be enough to knock out my druid because we were still at first level (he did it in front of an NPC who pretty much immediately healed her afterwards) but the thing he always neglects to mention is the time my ranger/rogue almost killed him with a single arrow because his character (an ape bard with half orc stats) was approaching her in a forest before they'd officially met so when the DM told me she could hear something rustling and getting closer so obviously she hid in the foliage and readied her action to shoot an arrow (with sharpshooter because she knew she'd probably be able to hit most things you'd expect to find in a forest with ease) when she could see something so obviously at the first glance she assumed some animal was tracking them and nearly one shot his level 5 or 6 character because being a Gloomstalker with one rogue level she did 30 something damage with a single arrow and still had another 1-2 attacks she could've (and would've) used had he not screamed and thus revealed himself as not an animal tracking them
I didn't realize the title says not only worst but also *best* types of players... 🤪 Very confusing, I was like "What's the problem with these types, they're adorable!" Normally these types of video concentrate on either toxic *or* great players. EDIT: Oh, I just realized the thumbnail says: 'I hate these player types'. No wonder...
The "Power Gamer" used to be the type that bugged me the most... but they've been dethroned recently by the "Escapist". I just can't work with people who REFUSE TO PUT FORTH ANY EFFORT.
The player that really annoys me (as a GM and a player) is the rules lawyer. Now, I don’t mind a friendly reminder about the rules every now and again, just don’t be condescending and belittling about it! I absolutely hate it when someone explains the rules in a condescending manner. Oh! I almost forgot about the always right! This type of player has to be right about everything (even when they’re totally wrong)! They will never admit to being wrong and they’re extremely difficult to reason with. They hate being challenged because they fear being proved wrong.
I'm between Actor and Storyteller/explorer... I mean.. I guess you could say a Stella Adler actor. I need the homework of the storyteller to do my acting.. I don't perform and display my "scenes" .. I experience the character... which is a type of actor but not, I think, the one you meant. I trick myself into believing the fantasy instead of trying to make it look like I do.. you know? (I often cry in RP because.. that is awesome)
The "GM's From The Other Side of the Table"... this player doesn't have to min-max their character, their goal is to take over the game. They'll argue rules, and if proven wrong, fall back on "well, this is how I would do it if *I* was GMing". They'll try to steer the party, steer communication, steer the narrative, not toward a better outcome, but toward what they want.
The Downright Rediculous, outrageously silly player: He will come into your game rolling a Druid. He will then use Shape-Change to turn into a bird. He will then fly up about 60 feet to be sure he is directly above an enemy. Then, he will shape change again, this time into a Gorilla - with a top hat. He will then proceed to perform The People's Elbow wrestling move on the enemy 60 feet beneath him. He doesn't care if the fall kills him or not - he jist wants to be over-the-top, silly, and put on a show for the other players, and the DM.
I feel like Killers is too narrow a catagory. You get good and bad powergamers, you get selfcentered actors and storytellers who will try and steal the narrative from the DM and ruin the experience for everyone. Just like other players can be good or bad, there are killers who want to kill everything, and there are killers who just really enjoy combat and combat encounters. They want to fight every enemy, and explore every room to make sure the dungeon is cleared completely. They don't always want to kill EVERYTHING, and can walk thru a town without murderering every NPC and player. The thing is, while an actor wants to act and roleplay, a killer (or combat enthusiast) just wants to fight and kill monsters, and neither gets along with the other. The actor thinks the Combater is just a sociopath who wants to murder everything all the time, and the killer thinks the actor is a over dramatic windbag who wastes time with pointless bullshit when there's things to go fight. It's dungeons and dragons, not talk to the king for an hour and a half and haggle with a shopkeeper for 20 minutes. Neither side is wrong, and neither is right. Both are equally valid ways to play the game, and I feel sad that after saying that he was gonna give every type a fair shot, he dumps on ppl who just enjoy combat and says not to play with them.
I'm a killer storyteller. I want to tell an interesting story by identifying the problem, deducing the solution, and then executing the plan and the problem NPC in the raddest most savage way that I can think of. I never min-max characters (they're always homebrewed with some kind of theme with the gameplay designed by the GM) but I minmax strategies in context with the either the best and/or most creative strategy to win. This involves dropping on an enemy's head from orbit, casting layers of illusions to mask the real attack, demolishing their house while they're sleeping, riding the most dangerous beast into battle, and when the GM is tired of me dominating and playing cautiously he always has a vague but functional backstory to "trigger" a change where I'll play way more recklessly and ruthlessly. I'm always a murder hobo, but I'm one that tries to be useful and entertain the rest of the party.
How about the Forever Noober who never learns the ropes of the game, never learn how anything works, is not very good at gaming in general and would be better of with an extremely minimal rules set. (This is fine, but should have been considered in session zero, or before session zero. 'They said they wanted to play a role playing game but we are playing a "rule playing game"'!). Or the Alpha Gamer (this is from co-op board games), they take over and direct the other players in what to do, often not even as advice but as orders. This might be a subclass to the winner class.
I guess I'm a bit of a storyteller, but it's the challenge to make sure I know if other players aren't like that. And to not make them feel pressured to change their backstory for example with other characters. If they had their own ideas in mind. My idea is to be helpful, but that probably could come across as pushy or something?
I've run into several "scamp" characters. Their objective is to grief player characters and NPCs alike, mostly for their own amusement or to drive the plot along. Our scamps have been lovable trickster characters that find crafty or sneaky solutions to problems, though I've seen several scamps who drag the plot to a crawl to get in a good griefing.
The DM-wannabe. I have a player who frequently cuts me off to narrate what he thinks is going to happen, and then I have to erase what he just said from everyone's mind to put them back on track. Oh crap, now you know my game is on a track. Please, look at this pen for me *FLASH* You remember nothing from this comment.
Im the enciclopedia, I know almost all the rules, I know most of the classes, and my table ask me when they have any doubt, but always respect the DM choise. I'm there to obtain oficial information pr posible interpretacións when requested, but I'm not a lawyer.
I'd like to multi-class actor and escapist. I think the art is knowing when to dial it back (Frequently) and when to give your passion full-reign. But aren't we all escapists?
A subtype of the Joker would be the Quipper - you sort of mentioned him towards the end of that section. You know, the one who never misses a chance to make a funny (or "funny") comment or pop-culture reference regardless of the situation and tone. Argh, those drive me crazy.
I watched this video trying to figure out which type I fit into as a player and couldnt find myself. I feel like I'm a bit of several of them at any one time. Joker, storyteller, actor, escapist, socialite, explorer. I feel I've been them all at one point or another.
I think I'm an escapist (aka - no homework thanks) lets have some fun and build non-premium characters (like a gnome barbarian with strength penalty or halfling ranger who can't use a longbow).
I hear often complains that I dont max out XY stat during character creation (mostly for damage) and jokes that i can't make good character - simply because i don't min-max my character like a chimp and try to put some story, logic and purpose behind it.
Thank you. That goddamn irritating trope buzzword idiocy "murder hoboes lawlzorz" is the type of generalizing idiocy label applied by someone who I do not want to play with, nor do I.
Unfortunately, in one of the games I'm a player in, we have a socialite who is kind of a fear-of-missing-out Nazi. If even one other person is unable to show in a group of 5 players for one session, they straight up refuse to play, and if they happen to be unable to show, they don't want anyone else to play.
Player type that just about ruined the hobby for me, the Pervs. Players who play just to live out some fantasy or some kink, or some furry/monster whatever. They take Horney Bard to a whole new level...
I have DM methods for dealing with killers and precious types to break them of those habits, but the ones I genuinely dislike are winners and powergamers because they're missing the point of the experience which is about telling a story. Not playing a war game like 40k.
The 3d chess player it’s player who isn’t focused to much on anything in particular they can be but is excited to run into problems or combats so they can solve it with a clever escape plan or one up move nobody thinks about. they want the Aha moment.
*Thanks for watching!* Did I forget any of the player types in D&D and other roleplaying games? Let me know in the comments below!
Take a look at the brand new Portrait Works app! It's the ultimate tool that gives you any portrait you need for your game!
Find them here: www.portrait.works/
Find each chapter easily by clicking on the timestamps in the description.
Hm, I don't think any of these types of players exist in pure form. Every player combines two or three of these aspects.
Fortunately, I've never experienced a killer. I'm more familiar with the butt-kicker who enjoys fighting.
Then I know the specialist, who is usually infatuated with a particular class and wants to become a master of this profession.
What I missed most was the tactician - because that's what I am to a large extent myself. I have a lot of fun overcoming complex obstacles as cleverly and elegantly as possible.
I really didn’t hear you cover great players, explorer’s was about the best players you’ve meet?
What about players who actually care about the game/story/each other characters/team players?
A player type I call "The Detective", is always looking for clues and deeper meaning in every encounter, setting or utterance (by players and/or NPC's), often to the point of seeing plots or intrigue that the GM hadn't intended. Some GM's I know will sometimes alter their original story if they like the theory that player has come up with.
Possibly a variant of "The Storyteller".
I desperately want one of those…
I think that might be what category I fall into, though maybe not so obsessively. But yeah, I think I do have a tendency to think about if the specific enemies we encounter or other details might reflect on the plot and generally what's going on.
Another branch category of this, I think, is “the Theorist.” These are the ones who, like the Detective, seek a something deeper than the surface level story. The difference is that they are more prone to taking the world itself into deeper levels, often far deeper than what the GM ever intended. They are the ones who connect dots, try to pull all the strings of each and every story line, event, and interaction, no matter where, and bring them all together as if it were one HUGE world puzzle!
I think there are good and bad sides to this. The good is that I tend to find these people, however outlandish, to be heavily inspiring, since they have these huge ideas. The bad is that they often prove very distracting, trying to pull everyone else at the table, including the GM onto their own boat. Unfortunately, oftentimes with GMs, the story and world building are largely surface level, and the fact that the Theorist even thought to go deeper means they are taking this 10xs more levels deeper than what the GM ever considered doing! Lol
As a GM, I like to rely on it. Make a bit of a sandbox world with just random 'toys' for the players to play around with, and maybe a draft of a larger story, villains and stuff happening in the world... and then when players start talking about what they think is actually happening, what they think is important and relevant... I may take those things and make them relevant and turn them into the main story. For example, I might have started with the idea of there being a BBEG who acts from the shadows and no one is yet aware of his scheming. But the players started suspecting a well-known evil warlock from a neighboring land, so I ditched the not-yet-revealed BBEG for the one that actually had some established history and connections already known to the players. And over time, we even made the warlock intertwined with the backstories of the PCs so for some it became a personal revenge, for others a quest of self discovery, and generally I liked the idea much more than my initial plan.
So, since the story should focus on players, I like the idea of having my own plans and ideas only as a stop-gap until I find out what the players actually care about, at which point they drive the story forward with their ideas.
I have several and together they can so,e times follow threads that aren’t there. They like to collect everything like it’s a video game. However they are really valuable and ensure plots progress. As long as there is balance it’s wonderful.
I miss the one trick pony: the player who doesn't care about the system or the world. The character they play is always the same. I know a player who always plays mercenary type character. Its a rather rare type who cares not a lot about what the other players want or what the dm does as long as he can be the one thing he likes to be.
sounds like a more specified version of the escapist though, "i dont like my life, but this guy's life i can really imagine" sort of deal.
@@ripopol it is obviously possible that there os an overlap but o haven't seen it yet.
@BlackMage hard to imagine for a player with about 20 years of experience. But will probably be true for some.
there is an overlap here that I've seen many times. I've seen it go hand in hand with toxic play styles a lot. the person who always wants to be the thief that steals things from the other players and acts as obstacle rather than a link. I've dealt with more than I'd like, and most of the players I've seen get tired of this person rather quickly.
Reminds me of one of my players that chose proficiency in calligraphers tools and some of the PCs were upset because it’s a useless tool but he made sure to use it every chance he could like when they would split ip he would always write a note and leave it on the door and me as the DM I would always narrate how beautifully written it was
I feel there are also subtypes here. I usually use active and reactive players. While it is possible for any that you have discussed here to be active or reactive, I think know what you have will help your game.
Active Players will poke a prod. They will interact with the world and surroundings of their own accord with and without prompts. They want to know the details and descriptions so they can fiddle with them, and play around in the shared world.
Reactive Players will only interact or become engaged with the world in reactive to an event or a prompt. They are unlikely to find their own adventure or motivation and will often just idle until given something to bounce off.
Knowing which type of these two you have can often help the DM set pacing and aid with getting the characters involved
I'm DMing a game for a group of friends, and I have been for about 4-5 months now. I love them all, but unfortunately they are all reactive players. I want to put in the effort to make an awesome and interesting campaign, but they don't interact with the world of their own accord. I've nearly lost all of my motivation to DM for them because they mostly just sit there and turn the pages, and I'm not sure how to bring this up with them.
@drinkablebean honestly, with your group, I would just do a low effort railroad adventure that is just fun. I understand your woes, though. I usually get stuck with reactive players. I would love to tell a grand story with intrigue and motivations, but in my experience, it just isn't possible with a reactive group. Most of the time, reactive players tend to be the ones who are just in it for some company and some fun. They aren't interested in psychological character growth or the emotional/mental consequences of the stuff they have seen. However; it is an opportunity to do weird stuff that usually won't fly in games with more ambitious and involved players. Take this as an opportunity to let the wheels fall off and embrace chaos maybe? This is assuming your reactive players are also the type that would enjoy this stuff. If not, I have no advice.
Have them abducted by a hill giant who wants to keep them as pets. The weird social outcast hill giant could try to dress them up and play with them the way some people do with their tiny dogs. Not abuse, but the adventure becomes how do we get out of this without getting killed by a giant. Combat may be out of the question entirely. The giant isn't cruel, but certainly wouldn't let them go on adventures or do dangerous stuff. They may even enjoy and entertain the weird life for a few sessions.
Thrust a situation upon them in which they inherit or otherwise become the proprietors of a tavern for what could be an endless stream of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia adventures.
Also the OSR adventure Barkeep on the Borderlands comes to mind. It is an epic bar crawl adventure.
Anyway, whatever happens I hope ot all works out and you are able to have fun as well, because running a game and not enjoying the game you run is just a job without pay
The tacticians… maybe a power gamer variant, but it’s less about optimizing character and more about optimizing encounters. They can come up with clever ideas, but can also contribute to analysis paralysis or spend an entire hour coming up with the most convoluted way to take out three guards without making a sound. They also tend to overthink grid movement to avoid attacks of opportunity or rounds without attacking at all cost.
The team player. The one that wants everyone to have their spot in the limelight so the group, as a whole, is elevated. Often takes an opportunity to ask another player character "Oh, you know about this. What do you think?"
May we all strive to be that player! I am definitely an actor/storyteller type and I have been trying to remain cognizant of not stealing the show but using that innate desire to perform as a tool to put the spotlight on others! Helping the other players feel comfortable to get into the story/character from whatever angle they seem interested in.
-Dan
-Dan
I think it's all a matter of degrees, every single one of these can be negative when taken to either extreme. Inverting even the ones that were played here as complete negatives can be problematic. The Anti-killer can be a drag on your party too (The pure pacifist cleric who never wants to kill anything and will actively try to stop the party from getting in fights is pretty frustrating to game with if you're playing a character whose primary purpose in life is glory in battle). The Anti-socialite is that player who ignores you when you talk to them by their real name, because "Who is Kevin? I am Itarian D'welienmar Gowaine, I know not whom this Kevin is" which can be kind of annoying when you came out here not just to play a game but to hang out with your actual friends, not their characters. There's a lot of value in being able to read your table as a player and figure out what sort of behavior is acceptable and what might be disruptive.
4:52 reminded me of all your fun NPC's you had on the show. They may not have been for everyone, but I thought they were an absolute blast!
Definitely a mix of actor/storyteller and a little bit of power gamer in there
Look I lover immersion and good stories and I took theater classes, so yeah lmao
What I'm missing is an idea how to make the different types come together... if possible at all. You will probably not get a Killer to work out well with a Storyteller or a Planner/Puppeteer (did I miss that one? The one that tries to "solve" the game by planning it completely from start to finish, telling everyone what they MUST do?) to work with a Joker (in the Heath Ledger style, someone who just "does things"), but others can work well together if you plan the story for that. Powergamers will gladly follow a Planner's plan to get more loot out of it, Killers will gladly provide the front line fighting force for their plan and so on.
Could you maybe put a bit more emphasis on the wants and goals of the different player types and how to get them to come together?
You forgot about the "harmonic center" which is a player that hears or gleans onto that one, or second particular detail about your game that they find a way in-game to have their character be some type of active force as a catalyst that finds a way to be some form of answer to almost any problem that the other players characters "might" benefit from because of that "piece of information" that got their creative juices churning to begin with to the potential detriment of the game.
I've found that assigning rules lawyers to look things up for you during the game makes them shut up more. This gets easier to do the longer the campaign is running. You can also turn their annoying habbit around by having them help other players accomplish something they want sooner
I've been just about all these players but mostly bcuz it's what the group brought out in me & imma joker at heart
A variant of the explorer might be the "I follow"
Going down the table, whenever you might ask what they're doing when going into town, they just say "I follow".
They say that they're enjoying something, and they may make a neat concept, but it just acquiesces into a follower of the party.
Dude, your impersonations are so damn good!
A bit of a rant:
Im gonna confess and say that I can be a toxic player. Would like to have som input.
When I played the most we were a group playing once every week for a couple of hours per session. Im think I am classified as a joker mixed with a socialite. I liked to hang and chill with my friends.
I was very much the "what does this butto do" and caused a bit of mayhem from time to time by being possessed or trying to seduce a main npc, or any npc.
Since I have adhd I would have a problem just sitting and listening for an 1hour or so while one of the party did something and would then concoct a plan that I thought was cool.
How can I be more accomodating to other players and the DM. I want to roleplay more but always feel like I make a fool of myself.
Thanks 😀
Oof the killers are super annoying. I'm lucky that my players are not those types. But the best way I managed to keep them in line was to make it clear that attacking BBEG at first sight was going to result in horrible death and probably torture. (The villain had about a dozen henchmen and an ogre body guard right there)
If they can't get the message after that, there is no helping them without a hard lesson 😬
by every type you mentioned. i feel, Heya! that's me that is me! All except the powergamer- and this makes me sad. How can i better myself.
Jokers and Power gamers are the bane of my existence.
The escapist probably encompass a strong majority of players / fans of D&D and can probably be split further into positive or negative crowds easily.
I'd say I'm a power gamer-actor hybrid
I use PortraitWorks and it's awesome.
I would argue that every one of these types are effectively escapists. They just escape in different ways.
A good game has balanced players.
Levity tempered with solemnity.
Competitiveness integrated into their sense of cooperation.
Self-awareness with a bit of empathy.
I never put a name on it, but I definitely know a Precious. It's their narrative or they sabotage the game.
Power gamers can be annoying if they are gimmicky, but man, winners are the worst in my experience. I hate DMing for people trying so hard to win the game they make it unfun for everyone at the table.
I am the Storyteller
The Actor normally sucks. They are rarely good "actors" and take over the game and you need to have people who don't care about playing. Has never worked with my games as they are more focused on the adventure
Gotta admit, I getting really sick of the Jokers as a DM. I love humor, don't get me wrong, but it seems like every Joker just designs the character that IS the joke, rather than the character who TELLS the jokes, and it's always pretty much the same joke every time: HA HA, look how silly my character is.
You forgot the contrarian.
😑
So, you've seen a few player types and you hate all but 1-2? Wtf
The Instigator: I think this was in an earlier version of this video, couple years ago… the Instigator plays well with others right up until there’s a decision to be made, if the party is deciding on a course of action that is not the most excited story/version of events, they’ll have their PC shoot at the god, or move the rock, or touch the sleeping mound of fur just to see what happens, if they or any other PC gets hurt or killed it was worth it cause the story is better now that we did something rather than nothing… and “nothing” was retreating from the bigger bad guy that showed up or sneak around the exciting thing the party was trying to avoid.
Similar to the one I just posted, "The Detective", always looking for clues and deeper meaning in every encounter, setting or utterance (by players and/or NPC's), etc.
This might be a subtype of the joker. As a person with an immersed/serious playstyle, I detest this subtype. I like funny worlds, but not "senseless" ones. Though that is probably just personal preference.
XianHu's detective seems more like an explorer-storyteller mix, even though the curiosity and the sometimes literal poking around are shared with the instigator.
@@kiram.3619 similar, but no…not really. My play style is not that of a Joker, unless it’s a campaign of jokers…(because when I DM I want players to) I try to align my head cannon with what the GM is going for, you got a Viking Game, I’ll research Vikings come up w/ a viking character, etc…. However when we beat what we think is the BBEG, and they get resurrected by their boss, and my party wants to just run away.. I’ll fire a shot just because for me as a player it’s a better story (better= a story with more interesting occurrences)… did I get hit with Feeble Mind and be at an INT and CHA of 3 till party could find a healer? yes. Was that funny? Wry much so. Was that more interesting than the alternative? Hell yeah-we found who she/boss is and where she’s from what she can do, also lead to discovering a famous in game tavern full of shadow dancing thieves guild so that we could prestige class? Why Yes, thank you for asking. Have no idea what the story would be if I did what party wanted, back out, no info, no leads, just scared, no tavern with excellent pies and thieves.
The assistant. We make sure the party doesn't fall into analysis paralysis. We make sure party members don't forget their buffs ( or the dm forgets monster buffs). We tug at other peoples comments about their characters to help draw them out. We're probably normally a DM and want to make sure everything moves as fluidly as possible for everyone so we can keep playing.
I'm inclined to take that personally.
Thats what I want to be, but I'm often a joker. I'm aware of it and I avoid to disrupt the game by asking myself, if my joke can be made in character. If not, I won't make it. Doesn't work always tho', but I'm working on it.
Yep, that's me. In our online games it's often me who keeps the track of all our equipment and quests' progress while also keeping in mind the main plot and helping our DM to explain some game mechanics he didn't expect the players would ask him.
I normally would be just a DM but my schedule is overloaded and chaotic af so I just can't spend time on organizing my own games(
Oh that's me for sure but I'm bad at it 😅
This type is also the forever dm who gets to play
I ran a campaign for a group of new players, going on close to a year now. It was designed to be a 'classic' fantasy kind of game, with an epic escalation in a LotR/Narnia sort of way.
About 3 months ago, we all slowly came to the realization that they were all, more or less, Explorer style PCs. The transition to higher-level play, where they have so many powers to affect the narrative, was not so fun. So we're starting over, as the campaign narrative I was building up was not comfortable for players who didn't like to drive the narrative.
It's good to see that Player type validated here. It was nobody's fault, as they were discovering themselves as they were discovering the game, and I wish I had better foresight. Siné.
The Pollyanna. For this player the heroic ideal is tied up in making everybody's life better. Everybody's.
They'll talk to every single NPC (for them there are no extras in a scene) and try to find out about their lives & ambitions. When not controlled they can slow the game to a crawl, but otherwise they're great for encouraging roleplay & interaction with the setting. They tend to make good hearted PCs that come up with ways of dealing with encounters without combat. Just have a list of names ready for all those background NPCs. You'll need it. 😉
That's me.
X I'm in this picture and I don't like it
@Dragonfan You carry on being you, you hyper compassionate wonder, you!
It's the GM's job to set some limits to keep the game moving. There's no need for you to become callously goal focused. Don't you dare change!
@@justinparry1621 Thank you 😊
@@dragonfan8647 if you pop into a new game it can be a helpful tip to a gm that "um ah hey Im this type of player.... You will likely need x while I'm here"
Precious Killer combo, “I take everything I want, we do what ever I want and if another player does not like then I kill their character,” has to be the worst! If I ever get a sniff of one I will have conversation before removing them from the game.
Killers would do well in zombie apocalypse survival scenarios where they're supposed to kill everything. Just don't give them companion NPC's unless you make those extremely easy to resurrect (Like in the game Magicka, where team killing is part of the game play).
Can confirm from experience running zombie games. For added flavor, have them play themselves in the real world. They trick themselves into being invested real quick.
One of my nephews earned the nickname Captain Chaos. He is very much "the joker" in your taxonomy. He isn't trying to win. He isn't trying to make anyone else lose. He's just trying to have fun by doing something he finds interesting or amusing. From the perspective of the other players (whether playing an RPG or a board game), he tends to introduce a chaotic, unpredictable element to any game he plays.
I'm absolutely a storyteller and I love playing with actors!
As a DM, I typically find myself hosting socialites and explorers.
As always when categorising personality traits: you are never one but a mix of a bunch. Also changing with the daily mood, the group and the character one is playing.
Yeah, definitely! I know I'm a bit of a joker in real life so that does affect my characters. However, I will never try to break the story just for the sake of fun. Just love to bring those lil funny moments to make the group feel loose a bit before getting devoured by a giant killing dragon :x
The Leader - The person who in the party ensures that everyone is heard from and actively cuts off their fellow party members if they are interrupting someone else. It's a great player to have at the table. They'll often lead without thinking they're a leader because they instinctively want everyone to take part. It's an incredible personality type but rather rarified.
Never considered what I do a player type.
Just considered it common courtesy. n_n
it usually is the GM (in my experience) but that's beautiful to see that some players do it too!
@@uldirone4724 genuinely it can happen in a party too. I've even started looking out for it and when I see it getting NPCs to grant the party a title of some kind that names that player the representative of the group. Like I said, it's rare but it's really cool to see.
Y'all sound like some quality players. :D
I could also see this falling in with the "assistant" someone mentioned above. Usually it's another gm who's playing.
I think the interesting thing is that these types are not mutually exclusive. The longer you play the game, the more I find hybrid types, or people who roll in and out of types depending on the content of the game, or the people they play with.
For instance, a Socialite who sorta becomes an explorer while they are playing, but doesn't really show how excited they are about it until questioned later. Or a powergamer who builds a crazy character and then throws optimization out the window at the table because they are more of a storyteller and don't care what happens to their characters. That sorta thing.
Yeah, I tend toward that last thing. Character concept is a big deal for me, but the *concepts* aren't always optimal. Like one of my characters is a thrown weapons specialist in 3.5 D&D, a game known for not supporting that character type well. But it was part of a storytelling character concept I liked, and I try to optimize as much as possible *within the boundaries of that concept*.
Just in time! after 6 years as a DM studying your channel, I have managed to get a break and become a player. now I can use more knowledge of a different type and be the best player for my group
Fun how some Player Types are also DM Types, and some really jive with each other like stated. It's fun when your DM is the Adversarial type and all players are Power Gamers. As a reverse Power Gamer (or Gimp as I like to call it), I play well with those Author type DMs who want to share a story so much that every encounter is really easy.
Also, this sounds like horoscope if you think about it :]] Im a Gimp Rising, Joker Moon, and Actor Sun.
Yes, my current group has 2 storytellers who alternate which one wants to GM, with the other typically becoming the party leader. It works very well for us.
Yeah, a power gamer DM is quite something: They play to "win" so they think nothing of throwing an ancient red dragon at a level 1 party, because "it's in the monster manual".
Best campaigns i have been a part of, all actors and jokers, literally was invited by a friend in theatre class, and another having 2 dedicated storytellers, I tend to think what my character can do to add fun to the world as I dont play lots of serious characters but all my characters are capable of being serious, and there being a few good role players and a comedic relief made for good times!
There is a difference between someone playing a jocular character and disrupting the flow with silliness.
Tip to new DMs. the fewer players you have in your game, the better the odds you will get a good combo of types. traditionally you want 4 to 6. I say shoot for 2. adjust your encounters for their action economy and you will get a good game out of them. side note: I ran a game with 11 players once, it was a disaster.
In my experience two is too few. A lot of the best bits in RPGs are driven by interactions between players, two is a difficult number to DM for because there just aren't enough of those interactions. I'd say 3-4 is the sweet spot.
@@jbaidley my favorite number of players is 3: 3 is enough for the characters to have enough breadth that they can handle a wide variety of situations, but not so many that you risk unintentional overlap. 3 is enough that you never have a 2 way tie in decision making, but not so many that decision making conversations get bogged down by player numbers. The only problem with 3 is that if someone is missing you can't really play, which is where I think 4 has an advantage (since with scheduling these days, 4 might turn out to be 3 more often than not)
On the 11 player game: yeah that's not gonna be good. I tried the great idea of playtesting a game I was writing once with 16 players. Teenage me was not wise
@@jbaidley Ye, I would agree to this. It could depend a little bit on the experience of the players, but in general for me its far more pleasurable to have 3 or 4 players. Biggest point for this is, as mentioned, much player interaction with nearly no more effort for me.
My first dnd experience was about 8 or 9 people, grew to 11. DM hadn't played in 20 years, everyone else except for one person was either brand new or very very inexperienced to D&D. Nightmare game, I'm shocked I ever continued playing D&D.
When I first started about 8 years, it was at my public library and it was open to EVERYONE. The librarians clearly didn't understand that there were limits to the game. There was a point where we had like 23 people in a group with one DM. Not to mention we were playing 4th edition at the time. One round of combat would literally take 1-2 hours out of the 2.5 hours we would have to play. It also didn't help that people would just show up for 1-3 sessions and then never show up again and/or show up 2 hours late into a session. It was a horrendous experience.
The supportive significant other: the person at the table who really doesn't even want to be there but is only playing because they want to be supportive to their significant other.
That's similar to the socialite really, maybe not as much being social to everyone but still attentive to people more than the game really.
Having one Joker at the game table is always good as long as they control themselves.
Depends on the type of game you want to play. Recently I got a Joker to my narrative driven horror-ampaign and I'm already considering kicking him out of it after only two sessions. As a person he's a nice guy, but as a player he just doesn't get that I'm trying to create an atmosphere in my game and he's completely ruining it for me and my other, much more story-oriented players with his clowning. I would love to have this guy in a not-so-serious campaign, but not when I'm trying to run atmospheric and story-focused horror.
Did you communicate this to him?
A joke here or there is welcome since the ever present dour atmosphere would be too samey and ultimately boring.
@@Dule810 I did, yes. Even before he joined the campaign I told him "Look, I know you're a joker as a player, but this is a serious campaign, you can't play your typical rediculous bard here. Do you really want to join?" He told me that he'd be able to play serious, too. But seems he isn't.
I'm not saying that humor has absolutely no place in horror - it has, of course, but at the right time and place. This guy on the other hand just acts as redicously with his "serious" character as I got to know him in way more fun-oriented campaigns (where it was actually quite nice to play with him).
He's not a bad person or even a bad player. He's just not the type of player for this particular type of game.
@@pugsleymcpuggington616 Fair enough
I really enjoyed this video. I’ve always described myself as someone who wants to advance the main plot or achieve things.
Now I think I’d describe myself a explorer or story teller/escapist.
I’m okay if someone else drives the story but it gets annoying to me as a player when the other players spend 3 hours arguing or shooting home made explosives with arrows trying to weaponize them.
There is a type of player that I missed in your ranks.
The substitutioner - That player substitutes his real life with the game live. He is not an escapist, because he does not want to escape his life, he feels he has no life. To him, the reality is but a dream and only the gameworld is the real world. I have known a couple of those. They had no problems enhancing the GM's descriptions in their mind, asking questions, they explore, they have fun and joking around etc. thus they made the world fantastically real for all other players as well. They are not actors because there is no need to act! They consider dying, making a new character as being part of the game world's cycle of life.
Just sooner or later you notice that they have this problem, they lose themselves but while the escapist loses himself for fun and a short time, the substitutioner never wants to end a session, they dislike the end of a campaign, they do not want to leave the fantasy behind at any cost.
As I said above I know a few of those and like to play with them very much AS LONG as the problem does not become serious. There is a fine line for those players, a line that, when crossed they find themselves in need of therapy.
If a players knew what all their skills/abilities do without asking and have accurately kept track of their stuff I would probably let people get away with a lot more frowned upon behavior lol.
The “team leader” who always wants to be the one choosing where to go. The “thinker” who always over analyses everything
I don't care which of these types shows at my game so long as they are willing to talk and compromise and not insist that they get to play however they want
The one that bugs me the most is the Joker. I play for a bit of escapism, acting, and storytelling, and Jokers just mess around. I do agree that an entire table of Jokers can work though, and is quite fun to watch.
The worst thing about powergamers is that it forces the DM to balance the encounters around them, especially so with less experienced DMs who dont fully understand how to cater encounters for different skill sets. Then everyone else is forced to either powergame as well (which many people find not fun) or sit and watch as the powergamer does everything and try not to die.
Your British-California Valley Girl-Socialite accent had me laughing the rest of the video.
My Curse of Strahd group has some power gamers, a couple of escapists, and EVERYONE is a joker. Nearly every session, they have me doubled over on the table laughing so hard that I can hardly breathe. We all know CoS is supposed to be gothic horror, but after a few sessions of trying gamely to keep the horror atmosphere and losing it while doubled over on the table laughing, I finally ditched trying to keep the horror atmosphere and ran it as heroic fantasy instead. We all were a lot happier that way, and two years later, we’re still going strong, and Count Strahd will die in a few more months in an epic, heroic battle.
Usually, the party adapted to the tone I set as DM (always by choice; forcing it doesn’t work). This time, the DM had to adapt to the party.
Another player type for you: the boyfriend/girlfriend. This player is there simply because the boy- or girlfriend is. They’re not really engaged in the game. They almost always leave if the relationship breaks up. Sometimes they turn into one of the other player types, and when that happens, they engage with the game and players a lot more. A lot of the time, however, they just coast along through the sessions.
I would probably be classified as a bit of a "Chameleon" - while out of the ones listed, I guess I would lean towards "explorer" personally - I'll be an actor with other actors, a storyteller with other storytellers, or a power gamer with other power gamers... with the reason I lean towards "explorer" being, I'm not a fan of being the party face or leader, since I have to play the "face" irl way too many hours of the day, every other aspect of the explorer is mutable for me though.
Vampire the masquerade is a great rpg system for winners. All the gm needs is enough popcorn and beer for himself.
Hell, in different campaigns, I've BEEN all of these 😂 I tend to go more either explorer, power gamer (I try and tone down to not ruin the fun for anyone), or the storyteller
I am a bit of a mix I think between Escapist and Explorer. Before you got to Explorer I had a lot of thoughts about how you labeled the escapist. I care deeply about the world you would create, the politics and intrigue, lore, as long as those things bring me out of the real world and into a fantasy world. When a medieval styled fantasy world brings me back into modern day issues, and concepts, that will often takes me out of the fantasy and into the world I am trying to escape from. But as long as it feels more fictional, harder to find real world issues expressed I will go very deep, explore the world and get a lot out it.
There is a bit of a balance to be had as some modern day issues can bleed through in a subtle way and still work, but when it becomes too real world inspired, with on the nose allegorical references that is where I will get bored, and not care much about the fantasy world any more.
I do not appreciate you making the whiny player American lol
Worst type I have encountered was a Edgelord/Precious/Main Character who also tried to implement herself into everyone backstories....
Thanks for the list, you made me realise how i am The Storyteller who takes feats and class features for more Backstory reasons, while rest of my party is Power gamers just killing everything in one round and making us all immortal with overpower healing. Then i feel like i am playing alone as some recognized person interacting with NPCs, while rest of my party just Significcally reduces the Difficulty of the game in very annoying way.
You would probably be happier in another group. I played in a similar group. Combat was the worst part of the game with that group.
I combine both, especially with how people are trying to play with feats at lv1 across the board now from backgrounds. Let me be strong yet interesting
@@ExeErdna i respect that. It's way better if i can talk with strong player like you, instead of one friend of mine who made a build to get insane high perception bonus And rolls twice due to companion, yet cannot even think of backstory about anything related to his character nor that companion at all.
you forgot about the players who refuse to put in any effort what so ever
The player that screws over every player at the table, then says, "Hey! That's what my character would do."
I feel like 'Scapegoat' would be somewhere in their nickname. It's not THEM being an asshole in a fictional scenario because they think it's therefore acceptable/easy to get away with, it's how their CHARACTER would behave! It'd be almost believable if they didn't then go out of their way to create an asshole character for every single game.
It's interesting to think of the combined types. For instance the actor or storyteller mixed with the joker doesn't want to break the world. They exaggerate the humour within the world (Sam Reigel from Critical Role). But a joker mixed with killer doesn't just kill everyone to dominate the world. They target the NPCs the DM and characters care most about to troll them (or steal the items they care about. I count a thief as pretty much equivalent to a killer because they still target innocent NPCs for negative results). Or a precious storyteller DM who gets upset the players are playing their story wrong.
I found a MARVELOUS way to deal with Killers. Give them a warning about being stab happy, if they persist just kill their character. No explanation of WHAT killed them, no saves they just drop dead. In one instance i had killer PCs hands explode before his head exploded.
I love all How To Be A Great GM videos! Guy's extremely entertaining & I can't wait every Friday to see his Duskmourne Chroncles game! It's like watching episodes of "Absolutely Fabulous!" *only old timers will get that reference.* But guy knows what I'm referring to!
Cheers Guy!
A hobo is just someone who wanders from place to place taking odd jobs. That's what most adventurers are. But these people wander from place to place doing that...but also killing things and often murdering everyone who even kind of gets in their way. That's the only implication. If the implication were that hobos kill people, they would just call this type 'hobos'.
There are only 2 main categories for DnD players really, and then, (more like the video presented) there are sub-categories from there. I (personally) don't over-complicate it or break it down any further than what is needed, and stick to the main 2 categories. (Not that it really matters, but... I've been playing since 1976, so there's my DnD creds for what's it's worth, which is nothing.)
You are either (for the most part) going to be a selfish or selfless player.
SELFISH PLAYERS: ...can't wait to level up, (again and again) and need to know what's going on in the story, but only care how it affects their character. Selfish players are reward driven and they need to be rewarded as the highest in the group. When someone else, (especially by dumb luck) finds the "big treasure chest" of gold, +2 sword, and spell scrolls, they are brooding mad and envious of that player the rest of the night AND campaign! They MUST be the one who investigates every desk, chest, drawer, cabinet, armoire, whatever... FIRST! Though not etched in stone, or exclusively, most selfish, reward-driven characters like to play Warlocks, Barbarians, Bards, Rogues, and braggadocios-type characters. If Alignment is used in the game, they ALWAYS choose CN, because they believe it's the alignment that lets them do whatever they want, whenever they want. They also LOVE to min/max optimize, and question and scoff at players as fools who don't. These players tend to get bored when conflict and combat isn't happening, and tend to be highly disruptive at those times, especially in RP, NPC, or DM scene set-up times. They (in literal schadenfreude) enjoy derailing campaigns and sabotaging other players, especially when they don't get their way, or their plan used. Only their character, their brilliant ideas, rolling their dice all night, and their stage-time matters to them.
However, in contrast...
SELFLESS PLAYERS: ...Like to level up, but they do so in think along the lines of: "How should I level up to help our team?" They can't wait to contribute more to the foundation of the story for the collaborative group efforts the DM laid down. They are team result-driven, and ensure all players are equally rewarded and included, regardless of who found what. They will engage and encourage the shyer players, to make sure they also have a chance to shine. They (generally) initiate conversations and group RPing discussions, but germane to the story, and rarely to never digress away from the story. They like to play Paladins, Clerics, Wizards, and Druids, and include flaws in their characters and generally LG or CG in Alignment. The selfless player has suggestions on how to proceed in any given situation, but wants to hear other player's thoughts too, and proceeds by popular vote. They also, to assist the DM, make sure players stay on track, and get back on track when they stray too far from the story or goal at hand.
Has the D&D community on YT put together "THE ULTIMATE SESSION ZERO CHECKLIST!"?
(Sorry, I figure anything Ultimate should be in a booming voice)
Do any of the VTT's let you search for group by player type? Do any of them offer suggestions on how to be a better player? Or how you can help the GM and the group?
I feel like you missed the scientist.
A varriant of the power gamer, who wised up after building a few very powerful characters.
And started running challenges for themselves.
They enjoy exploring unused spells or coming up with uses for items that are unusual.
.....
Or being an artificer and working with the dm to plumb the depths to which they can craft in the world.
New items.
New spells.
Vehicles that do strange and wonderis things.
Exotic abilities on weapons.
Strange constructs.
Essentially a power gamer/ story teller with a very creative bent.
Who if not carefully managed can break the game.....
But will always when having fun bend the world in insane directions.
* Precious story teller:" Crawford told me in that one video that d&d is about telling -your- story, why do you keep shutting down -my- story /npcs/etc & making changes to it?
* Precious winner:"I'm a -RROOLLLEE- player and expect the world to adjust to fit the carefully crafted backstory that serves no other purpose but to justify why my coffeelock (or whatever) is so awesome & shouldn't be treated like a dirty R-O-L-L roll player so will be expecting concessions for all of this awesome"
Ugh the winner/killer reminds me of one person in the group I play with he still brings up that one time he managed to do 10 damage in a turn (with a gun that he definitely didn't consult the DM about) which just so happened to be enough to knock out my druid because we were still at first level (he did it in front of an NPC who pretty much immediately healed her afterwards) but the thing he always neglects to mention is the time my ranger/rogue almost killed him with a single arrow because his character (an ape bard with half orc stats) was approaching her in a forest before they'd officially met so when the DM told me she could hear something rustling and getting closer so obviously she hid in the foliage and readied her action to shoot an arrow (with sharpshooter because she knew she'd probably be able to hit most things you'd expect to find in a forest with ease) when she could see something so obviously at the first glance she assumed some animal was tracking them and nearly one shot his level 5 or 6 character because being a Gloomstalker with one rogue level she did 30 something damage with a single arrow and still had another 1-2 attacks she could've (and would've) used had he not screamed and thus revealed himself as not an animal tracking them
I didn't realize the title says not only worst but also *best* types of players... 🤪
Very confusing, I was like "What's the problem with these types, they're adorable!"
Normally these types of video concentrate on either toxic *or* great players.
EDIT: Oh, I just realized the thumbnail says: 'I hate these player types'. No wonder...
The "Power Gamer" used to be the type that bugged me the most... but they've been dethroned recently by the "Escapist". I just can't work with people who REFUSE TO PUT FORTH ANY EFFORT.
The player that really annoys me (as a GM and a player) is the rules lawyer. Now, I don’t mind a friendly reminder about the rules every now and again, just don’t be condescending and belittling about it! I absolutely hate it when someone explains the rules in a condescending manner. Oh! I almost forgot about the always right! This type of player has to be right about everything (even when they’re totally wrong)! They will never admit to being wrong and they’re extremely difficult to reason with. They hate being challenged because they fear being proved wrong.
I'm between Actor and Storyteller/explorer... I mean.. I guess you could say a Stella Adler actor. I need the homework of the storyteller to do my acting.. I don't perform and display my "scenes" .. I experience the character... which is a type of actor but not, I think, the one you meant. I trick myself into believing the fantasy instead of trying to make it look like I do.. you know? (I often cry in RP because.. that is awesome)
The "GM's From The Other Side of the Table"... this player doesn't have to min-max their character, their goal is to take over the game. They'll argue rules, and if proven wrong, fall back on "well, this is how I would do it if *I* was GMing". They'll try to steer the party, steer communication, steer the narrative, not toward a better outcome, but toward what they want.
The Downright Rediculous, outrageously silly player: He will come into your game rolling a Druid. He will then use Shape-Change to turn into a bird.
He will then fly up about 60 feet to be sure he is directly above an enemy.
Then, he will shape change again, this time into a Gorilla - with a top hat. He will then proceed to perform The People's Elbow wrestling move on the enemy 60 feet beneath him.
He doesn't care if the fall kills him or not - he jist wants to be over-the-top, silly, and put on a show for the other players, and the DM.
I feel like Killers is too narrow a catagory. You get good and bad powergamers, you get selfcentered actors and storytellers who will try and steal the narrative from the DM and ruin the experience for everyone.
Just like other players can be good or bad, there are killers who want to kill everything, and there are killers who just really enjoy combat and combat encounters. They want to fight every enemy, and explore every room to make sure the dungeon is cleared completely. They don't always want to kill EVERYTHING, and can walk thru a town without murderering every NPC and player.
The thing is, while an actor wants to act and roleplay, a killer (or combat enthusiast) just wants to fight and kill monsters, and neither gets along with the other. The actor thinks the Combater is just a sociopath who wants to murder everything all the time, and the killer thinks the actor is a over dramatic windbag who wastes time with pointless bullshit when there's things to go fight. It's dungeons and dragons, not talk to the king for an hour and a half and haggle with a shopkeeper for 20 minutes.
Neither side is wrong, and neither is right. Both are equally valid ways to play the game, and I feel sad that after saying that he was gonna give every type a fair shot, he dumps on ppl who just enjoy combat and says not to play with them.
I'm a killer storyteller. I want to tell an interesting story by identifying the problem, deducing the solution, and then executing the plan and the problem NPC in the raddest most savage way that I can think of. I never min-max characters (they're always homebrewed with some kind of theme with the gameplay designed by the GM) but I minmax strategies in context with the either the best and/or most creative strategy to win.
This involves dropping on an enemy's head from orbit, casting layers of illusions to mask the real attack, demolishing their house while they're sleeping, riding the most dangerous beast into battle, and when the GM is tired of me dominating and playing cautiously he always has a vague but functional backstory to "trigger" a change where I'll play way more recklessly and ruthlessly.
I'm always a murder hobo, but I'm one that tries to be useful and entertain the rest of the party.
How about the Forever Noober who never learns the ropes of the game, never learn how anything works, is not very good at gaming in general and would be better of with an extremely minimal rules set. (This is fine, but should have been considered in session zero, or before session zero. 'They said they wanted to play a role playing game but we are playing a "rule playing game"'!).
Or the Alpha Gamer (this is from co-op board games), they take over and direct the other players in what to do, often not even as advice but as orders. This might be a subclass to the winner class.
I guess I'm a bit of a storyteller, but it's the challenge to make sure I know if other players aren't like that.
And to not make them feel pressured to change their backstory for example with other characters. If they had their own ideas in mind.
My idea is to be helpful, but that probably could come across as pushy or something?
I've run into several "scamp" characters. Their objective is to grief player characters and NPCs alike, mostly for their own amusement or to drive the plot along. Our scamps have been lovable trickster characters that find crafty or sneaky solutions to problems, though I've seen several scamps who drag the plot to a crawl to get in a good griefing.
The DM-wannabe. I have a player who frequently cuts me off to narrate what he thinks is going to happen, and then I have to erase what he just said from everyone's mind to put them back on track. Oh crap, now you know my game is on a track. Please, look at this pen for me *FLASH* You remember nothing from this comment.
Im the enciclopedia, I know almost all the rules, I know most of the classes, and my table ask me when they have any doubt, but always respect the DM choise. I'm there to obtain oficial information pr posible interpretacións when requested, but I'm not a lawyer.
I love you and what you do.
I'd like to multi-class actor and escapist.
I think the art is knowing when to dial it back (Frequently) and when to give your passion full-reign.
But aren't we all escapists?
A subtype of the Joker would be the Quipper - you sort of mentioned him towards the end of that section. You know, the one who never misses a chance to make a funny (or "funny") comment or pop-culture reference regardless of the situation and tone. Argh, those drive me crazy.
I watched this video trying to figure out which type I fit into as a player and couldnt find myself. I feel like I'm a bit of several of them at any one time. Joker, storyteller, actor, escapist, socialite, explorer. I feel I've been them all at one point or another.
I think I'm an escapist (aka - no homework thanks) lets have some fun and build non-premium characters (like a gnome barbarian with strength penalty or halfling ranger who can't use a longbow).
I hear often complains that I dont max out XY stat during character creation (mostly for damage) and jokes that i can't make good character - simply because i don't min-max my character like a chimp and try to put some story, logic and purpose behind it.
Thank you. That goddamn irritating trope buzzword idiocy "murder hoboes lawlzorz" is the type of generalizing idiocy label applied by someone who I do not want to play with, nor do I.
Unfortunately, in one of the games I'm a player in, we have a socialite who is kind of a fear-of-missing-out Nazi. If even one other person is unable to show in a group of 5 players for one session, they straight up refuse to play, and if they happen to be unable to show, they don't want anyone else to play.
Player type that just about ruined the hobby for me, the Pervs. Players who play just to live out some fantasy or some kink, or some furry/monster whatever. They take Horney Bard to a whole new level...
I have DM methods for dealing with killers and precious types to break them of those habits, but the ones I genuinely dislike are winners and powergamers because they're missing the point of the experience which is about telling a story. Not playing a war game like 40k.
I have a joker (out of game only) in game he is a power gamer… he is a really nice guy but he is still a child and dosent love the story.
The 3d chess player it’s player who isn’t focused to much on anything in particular they can be but is excited to run into problems or combats so they can solve it with a clever escape plan or one up move nobody thinks about. they want the Aha moment.
What did we learn today? I don’t know. Other than „play with people you like and who want the same things from ttrpgs like you“ maybe 😁