Elves with crossbows

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
my DM and I are getting into a pretty annoying argument

after a total party wipe we all started with new characters, he tells me to create characters based on flavor rather than min-maxing (which i rarely do anyways) however he has recently called me out on my new proposed character, an Elf Rogue with a focus on crossbows

he refuses to believe that an individual elf would take to using a crossbow rather than a regular bow

ive given him the basics, my elf is an urban elf and a rogue, i have yet to explain that he was orphaned and taken into a local thieves guild and was properly trained with a crossbow from a young age

what do i do, at this point if i explain the latter points he'll just wave it away as justification 
Frankly, it's none of his damn business.  Your character, your choice.  He really has no say in the matter.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
ok, perhaps i should have explained, hes letting me play him, hes just very very unhappy with it, to the point where when we hit the drow city he'll probably find any and everyway to kill me
ok, perhaps i should have explained, hes letting me play him, hes just very very unhappy with it, to the point where when we hit the drow city he'll probably find any and everyway to kill me



Sounds like a jerk.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
he also hates ponies

well atleast i always have my Equestria campaign 
My PC is playing a warforged wizard/cleric hybrid with 23 AC at level 2 who only uses blasts n melee and is the closest thing our party has to a defender.  I think its completely fine.  Salla is right, sounds like a jerk.
what do i do, at this point if i explain the latter points he'll just wave it away as justification 

Quit.
Simply state that you have lost interest, and can be contacted over XBL/PSN/Steam/whatever.

If however, you do continue and the inevitible plot-murder ensues, simply write "jr" next to the name on your character sheet and play the same damn character again.
Then wander off to go play videogames when the complaining starts.

ok, perhaps i should have explained, hes letting me play him, hes just very very unhappy with it, to the point where when we hit the drow city he'll probably find any and everyway to kill me


The invalidity of his argument aside, any player or DM that would passive-aggressively take his OOG issues out on you in game is a person I would reconsider playing with.

he also hates ponies


  Too bad.  Sounds like he could really use some lessons in the magic of friendship.
Thinking about creating a race for 4e? Make things a lil' easier on yourself by reading my Race Mechanic Creation Guide first.
sigh unfortunately hes a good friend and one of the only locals who DMs (besides me) in this surfer town that i know of

he recently decided to scrap the campaign and restart everyone at level 1, but i guess im not too hurt seeing as how much i hate drow (all underdark campaign before)

ill just have to work it out, we have a habit of trolling each other, i just have to play the most in bound passive aggressive character i can work

im thinking eladrin bladesinger 
Just go straight-up Human Fighter, configured all about combat.
If your DM scoffs at meangingless archetype tweaks, just play the most bland and boring concept of them all.
we have a dwarf cleric of moradin
'Generic Adventuring Party, forward!'
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
There's nothing terribly wrong with the generic adventuring party either.

Frankly, while I think it's silly for him to tell you no to a crossbow wielding elf, playing nice with others is also a plus.  For example, I enjoy playing drow, but if the people I am playing with are anti-drow, I won't play one out of courtesy to them.  I can come up with a character that won't irritate people and still have fun.

The bottom line is, there has to be harmony in a group, and if the DM or another player is annoyed or irritated with what you are playing, or how you are playing it, it /does/ impact the fun of the group.  Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but that's how it is.  Regardless of what the people above say about "play what you want" IMO, you have to balance what you want with what everyone else wants and compromise somewhere.  Don't be selfish is the message I am trying to put in here (and I'm not trying to imply you are).

Perhaps in this case, since he has such a hangup against your crossbow wielding elf, perhaps a Vryloka rogue with a crossbow would work.  You still have the same bonus to dexterity, and the same move of 7.  Unless you are specifically looking for the elf feat support, this might be a compromise that works for everyone.
elfves just come to mind when i think sharpshooter

i ditched it and am now in the process of making an all dagger halfling rogue 

it is important not to blow things out of proportion 
There's nothing terribly wrong with the generic adventuring party either.

Frankly, while I think it's silly for him to tell you no to a crossbow wielding elf, playing nice with others is also a plus.  For example, I enjoy playing drow, but if the people I am playing with are anti-drow, I won't play one out of courtesy to them.  I can come up with a character that won't irritate people and still have fun.

The bottom line is, there has to be harmony in a group, and if the DM or another player is annoyed or irritated with what you are playing, or how you are playing it, it /does/ impact the fun of the group.  Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but that's how it is.  Regardless of what the people above say about "play what you want" IMO, you have to balance what you want with what everyone else wants and compromise somewhere.  Don't be selfish is the message I am trying to put in here (and I'm not trying to imply you are).

Perhaps in this case, since he has such a hangup against your crossbow wielding elf, perhaps a Vryloka rogue with a crossbow would work.  You still have the same bonus to dexterity, and the same move of 7.  Unless you are specifically looking for the elf feat support, this might be a compromise that works for everyone.



Maybe, but this qualifies as something I can't imagine why anybody would ever care about, and certainly can't figure out why a DM would come down on a player over.  There are lots of races and classes I positively loathe and will never play, but if someone else likes them, more power to 'em.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Just go straight-up Human Fighter, configured all about combat.
If your DM scoffs at meangingless archetype tweaks, just play the most bland and boring concept of them all.



You could also go in the complete opposite direction with a Revenant Warforged Vampire|executioner. Nothing is cooler than Vampire Ninja Ghost Robot
So what he said was that he wanted you guys to make decisions based on flavor instead of min-maxing, but what he really meant was that he wanted you all to make stock high fantasy characters?


I've had that kind of DM before.    
"When Friday comes, we'll all call rats fish." D&D Outsider
So what he said was that he wanted you guys to make decisions based on flavor instead of min-maxing, but what he really meant was that he wanted you all to make stock high fantasy characters?


I've had that kind of DM before.    



"Make your decisions based on flavor!"
"Okay, what flavors are available."
"Vanilla, vanilla, and vanilla."
"Is there at least French Vanilla?"
"NO."
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I disagree with one of the earlier statements that the DM cannot mess with a character or concept because it is none of his buisness. It is the DM's campaign after all, and he bears the right to not allow certain things. However, those are normally certain races, classes, feats (dragonmarks are common) or things he/she deems unfair or overpowered. Not allowing an elf with a crossbow because it does not fit his image of an elven rogue is a poor decision. He did ask you to make your character, not his idea of his elven rogue. Not every member of a race falls under a stereotype, and both playing the stereotype and its exception can be fun and refreshing.
 
 Its already done, but i think it would have been better to stand behind your old character. Not aggressively of course, but firmly and reasonably. As important as lessening party conflict is, you do have to consider your own fun as imporant as everyone else's. Also, if the DM is willing to kill your character and ruin your time, even if he is your friend, it is probably a better idea to find anouther group. Even if you follow his stereotypes now, there may be a point down the line where he kills your character for anouther "wrong turn" in his idea of how the character, adventure, or campaign should go. Talk with him if you haven't.
 
 Hope this helps

He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. -Revelation 21:6

Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.-John Donne, Meditation XVII

My photo was found here.

Just go straight-up Human Fighter, configured all about combat.
If your DM scoffs at meangingless archetype tweaks, just play the most bland and boring concept of them all.



Exactly. An Elf with a crossbow is the least of his problems. How about a Dwarf Sorcerer? Thri-Kreen Paladin? Warforged Warlock? Pixie Slayer? Your DM sounds like a spoiled brat that can't fathom the fact that every character can't be a complete fantasy stereotype.
I'd troll him. Hard.

"Darn, no crossbow Elf. Here's my Dwarven Wizard hybrid Psion multiclassing into Shaman, then. =/"
"...whaaaaat..."
"Shucks. Should have let me stick with my Elf, huh? =/"

Your friendly neighborhood Revenant Minotaur Half-Blooded Dragonborn Fighter Hybrid Barbarian Multiclassing into Warlord

IMAGE(http://pwp.wizards.com/1223957875/Scorecards/Landscape.png)

Make a wilden artificer.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
Sign In to post comments