Forums of the Megaverse®

Where do you (as a GM or a player) draw the line on these distinctions?
I have three players that routinely draw inspiration from other sources.
Their methods are definitely different.
For example:
All three have played Assassins Creed and at my next PF campaign start up it was resquested that I run a rogues campaign. All three stated they wanted to play a character like Altaïr Ibn La-Ahad (the "main character for most of the game).
One started rolling stats and asking questions on how certain skills and combat maneuvers functioned mechanically.
The second began using my house ruled point allocation stat system and asked how certain psi powers might work and if I would allow for a selection of them that was slightly more than what a minor receives but significantly less than that of a major without seriously impacting his skill selection.
The Third produced a pre-generated character for my approval/modification that (at best) can be politely referred to as a carbon copy of the Video game character (and impolitely as munchkin but then that is why there is approval/modification step in the process).

All three Character generation methods are permissible in my games and are not the issue at hand. nor are the Characters really... I am just curious as to where others draw the distinction.
Nor are these three particular characters an isolated incident. There are others.
The splicers game comes to mind... 3 variations on The Guyver .
Phase World: They also love to play Halo (need I say more)? (although the party munchkin choosing to play a Tarlok took me by surprise).
And now they have asked me to run a Dead Reign campaign... considering their choices in Video Games, TV, Movies, and Books... something tells me I will have some rather interesting characters to cope with and none of them standard.
Do not get me wrong... I dislike discouraging player creativity even if it is a bit unoriginal. My biggest complaint with the hobby is when players get so caught up in the letter of the rules that they fail to use their imaginations at all.

I usually allow "inspired" characters but direct ripoffs are looked at like the crap they are.

My current group knows that I reward creativity and ignore carbon copies so its not an issue to me as much anymore.

Nxla666 wrote:I usually allow "inspired" characters but direct ripoffs are looked at like the crap they are.

My current group knows that I reward creativity and ignore carbon copies so its not an issue to me as much anymore.

so if I understand correctly you would view a carbon copy as a rip-off?
what is the difference then of one that is meant to emulate a certain source of inspiration and one that is merely inspired?

to me the three are very distinct.
Like you I view a rip-off as a carbon copy (often with severely bent if not broken rules to aid in the copy).
an "emulation" is a char that is copy of abilities (well with in the rules or with minor rule bending of the game) or is a copy of personality but not abilities.
and an inspired character is one where the source material gives incite into how the player wishes to run the character.
in the example I gave the first player was clearly inspired. He asked which skills would be best to emulate the free running ability demonstrated in the source material. beyond that his character was nothing like the source.
the second looked for ways to duplicate most of the abilities demonstrated in the source material.
the third...pure rip...

Yes.

Inspired character concept: "What OCC is closest to a SPARTAN?"

Emulated character concept: "How can I play a character like Master Chief?"

Rip-off character concept: "This is my character, you can call him 'Sgt. Major'."

gadrin wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:Where do you (as a GM or a player) draw the line on these distinctions?
I have three players that routinely draw inspiration from other sources.
Their methods are definitely different.
For example:
All three have played Assassins Creed and at my next PF campaign start up it was resquested that I run a rogues campaign. All three stated they wanted to play a character like Altaïr Ibn La-Ahad (the "main character for most of the game).
One started rolling stats and asking questions on how certain skills and combat maneuvers functioned mechanically.
The second began using my house ruled point allocation stat system and asked how certain psi powers might work and if I would allow for a selection of them that was slightly more than what a minor receives but significantly less than that of a major without seriously impacting his skill selection.
The Third produced a pre-generated character for my approval/modification that (at best) can be politely referred to as a carbon copy of the Video game character (and impolitely as munchkin but then that is why there is approval/modification step in the process).

All three Character generation methods are permissible in my games and are not the issue at hand. nor are the Characters really... I am just curious as to where others draw the distinction.
Nor are these three particular characters an isolated incident. There are others.
The splicers game comes to mind... 3 variations on The Guyver .
Phase World: They also love to play Halo (need I say more)? (although the party munchkin choosing to play a Tarlok took me by surprise).
And now they have asked me to run a Dead Reign campaign... considering their choices in Video Games, TV, Movies, and Books... something tells me I will have some rather interesting characters to cope with and none of them standard.
Do not get me wrong... I dislike discouraging player creativity even if it is a bit unoriginal. My biggest complaint with the hobby is when players get so caught up in the letter of the rules that they fail to use their imaginations at all.

Well, obviously not everyone who participates in RPGs do so out of any duty, most people play because it gives them a release or it kills time. My guess is that they're going with something that gives them something in feedback, whether it's "good old times" type of memories or just something they understand. I've met many people like that. Traveller RPG was a good example: since it wasn't like D&D where you could turn invisible and hide, or compensate for a crappy set of attribute numbers with a +3 sword (and usually five or six other things) or be teleported out of danger to save the day. They were forced to think and most couldn't. They wanted to be freaks.

It could be they're clueless as to what RPGs are all about and are supposed to mean, or means to the GM. It could be they just don't care...playing an RPG sure beats being stuck at home or watching the tube.

One of the things I noticed about PB players was that they all want to be something different or they want to maximize things.

You might try providing pre-rolled characters for them, just to see what their reaction might be I have an idea in my head where I'd run a game with characters rolled up and chosen by the PCs, then after a few weeks/sessions ask for their help and have them roll-play their opposites but they have to use the NPCs I've prepared. My guess is that they'll go for it, because...

1. It's not their PCs and they won't mind making dumb mistakes since they have nothing to lose.

2. Think they're getting 1 up on you because you're stupid and going to betray secrets to them.

Of course discount any dumb/suicidal ops by the players using these NPCs and the idea is for #2 to show them what they're really up against (as in scare them).

"Six Lanotaur Hunters and 25 Changelings"

Then you sit back and see how well they tried (or didn't) and see if they suddenly develop an urge to counter any measures gained from #2 without really having any knowledge.


>

This thread is not intended as a complaint/vent but more as a curiosity answerer.
the players I have are good within their spheres...
I do not expect everyone to be original.
In fact some of those inspired and emulated characters they run are some of the best I have ever had the pleasure to GM. (heck even the rip offs were not really all that badly handled either)

Damian Magecraft wrote:Where do you (as a GM or a player) draw the line on these distinctions?
I have three players that routinely draw inspiration from other sources.
Their methods are definitely different.
For example:
All three have played Assassins Creed and at my next PF campaign start up it was resquested that I run a rogues campaign. All three stated they wanted to play a character like Altaïr Ibn La-Ahad (the "main character for most of the game).
One started rolling stats and asking questions on how certain skills and combat maneuvers functioned mechanically.
The second began using my house ruled point allocation stat system and asked how certain psi powers might work and if I would allow for a selection of them that was slightly more than what a minor receives but significantly less than that of a major without seriously impacting his skill selection.
The Third produced a pre-generated character for my approval/modification that (at best) can be politely referred to as a carbon copy of the Video game character (and impolitely as munchkin but then that is why there is approval/modification step in the process).

All three Character generation methods are permissible in my games and are not the issue at hand. nor are the Characters really... I am just curious as to where others draw the distinction.
Nor are these three particular characters an isolated incident. There are others.
The splicers game comes to mind... 3 variations on The Guyver .
Phase World: They also love to play Halo (need I say more)? (although the party munchkin choosing to play a Tarlok took me by surprise).
And now they have asked me to run a Dead Reign campaign... considering their choices in Video Games, TV, Movies, and Books... something tells me I will have some rather interesting characters to cope with and none of them standard.
Do not get me wrong... I dislike discouraging player creativity even if it is a bit unoriginal. My biggest complaint with the hobby is when players get so caught up in the letter of the rules that they fail to use their imaginations at all.

I am such a pop culture/geek sponge that I never directly imitate something I see in a movie, but I cannot say the same for others. Heroes Unlimited in experience tends to attract this sort of player worse that any other Palladium game.(The No Conversions policy exists for a reason.) When I lasted designed a character(for Rifts), an Altara Warrior Woman Battle Magus, I had just seen Resident Evil Extinction. But I also refenced the Last of The Mohicans by having her fight in melee with a knife and tomahawk as paired weapons. Her TW weapon was a Lightblade(guess where that came from.) The point I am trying to illustrate id this: any gamer worthy of the name even if they directly rip off a pre-existing concept, should be able to take it in a direction far removed from its original medium.After all, doesn't RPGing begin with the idea of what you would do if you were that person/character?

unoriginal creativity???

anyhow. Original ideas get points in my game. Rips offs not much. The other problem is that characters in VGs usually have a bit of experience pre-game, so I make a point to note that your PC is a watered down fop compared to the character they wish to emulate.

But do I say no? Thankfully it isn't usually an option. What does become a problem is when they don't want the crap that goes along with the charactes. For instance Spawn. Yeah the power looks great and the image is cool but remember, you have a pcyhocitic demon clown who beats you every other day, calls you worthless, reminds you that your powerlful boss set fire to you giving you a -5 PB, and that your best friend and wife are now married with a kid you couldn't give her because you were impotent, oh and you are a slave to a demonic power

I'm at the age in life where the idea of eating player produced crap is about as appealing as running headlong into a wall made out of bayonets and lightning. Thankfully I fit into the the 'cranky old man' stereotype quite nicely (I'm a few years yeat of telling kids to stop playing on the lawn, though that may be beacuse I don't have a lawn).

So I can say with great certianty that when I recieve a lame arese character that the only sound louder than my great belly laughs will be the sound of the paper shredder working it's way through the character sheet.

I can take inspired by fairly well, and frankly I like to see a player get a little gleam in his eye as he furiously tries to craete his own interpretation on a common character, where we can see the similarities, but be bewildered and amazed at the obvious and character driven differences.

Even when the character handed to me looks suspiciously like a an emulation, I like to waive my moment of gleeful creation of confetti for a few moments to see exactly where it was heading. I had Post apocolyptic game set up and a player handed me his version of Mario. I was delighted to see that it had recived the 'ultimate treatment' kind of nicely and let it stand. after all it at least represents effort.

I line the rats's cage with the ripoffs, manly because I'm intolerant enough that I leave it to small domesticated rodents to poop all over it for me. Even combinations of ripoffs get me worked up, but I do wait for a sparkling invocation of backstory before giving it the heave ho (and in some cases there is more heaving than ho'ing). Wovernator (wolverine terminator) was a particularilly gosh-awful creation by a friend of mine that got nixed pretty much from the start. The spock/ghostrider combo seemed a little more inventive but got veto'ed anyway. needless to say one player could go several days before we would let one of his characters in.

so yes.
Inspired: has stolen elements of a character and woven them into a new and distinct character
Emulated: while literally meaning to copy, at least shows a creative impulse that can be tamed.
Rip-Off: a direct copy with too few variances (or none at all) to justify any character work be done.

Batts

gadrin wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:This thread is not intended as a complaint/vent but more as a curiosity answerer.
the players I have are good within their spheres...
I do not expect everyone to be original.
In fact some of those inspired and emulated characters they run are some of the best I have ever had the pleasure to GM. (heck even the rip offs were not really all that badly handled either)

Well very few RPGers are totally original.

I've had some decent ideas, then come to find out there's a movie/tv/etc that has something similar, and of course the first thing out of most people's mouths will be:

"CS are Nazis"

>

oddly enough the first thought in my head when I first read about them (25+ years ago) my first thought was not Nazi but "hey look! Fascists."

Damian Magecraft wrote:

gadrin wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:This thread is not intended as a complaint/vent but more as a curiosity answerer.
the players I have are good within their spheres...
I do not expect everyone to be original.
In fact some of those inspired and emulated characters they run are some of the best I have ever had the pleasure to GM. (heck even the rip offs were not really all that badly handled either)

Well very few RPGers are totally original.

I've had some decent ideas, then come to find out there's a movie/tv/etc that has something similar, and of course the first thing out of most people's mouths will be:

"CS are Nazis"

>

oddly enough the first thought in my head when I first read about them (25+ years ago) my first thought was not Nazi but "hey look! Fascists."

Me as well.

I find this most with superhero games. I want my players to have fun and if they want to play a ripoff, that's fine, all I ask is they give it a tweak and a new name AND not expect me to follow whatever canon that character came from.

My first impression of the CS was "hey, they're right!" - no wonder I like to play Chaos Earth. NEMA is the CS without the guilt trip.

when I first read about the CS I thought christian coalition for obvous and less obvious reasons

The first hint I can tell that a player is trying to get in a character from pop culture that is unfamiliar to me is when they try to tweak pwers and abilities or CCs in very speicific ways and have a hard time taking no for an answer

I use ships from different sci-fi,s tv shows like Startrek,Babylon5,Firefly,Farscape,Battlestar Galactica,and Starwars for the appearances of my ships.

I also use the Apparances of ther Aliens too,for mein.

killgore wrote:

Keldane wrote:If your character is a blond-haired, blue-eyed, brooding, self-hating, redemption-obsessed man who wears full plate mail and wields a gigantic two-handed sword, you're not fooling me.

You would me!
??????

Elric? I can't swear to the blue eyes as it's been some years since I last read the original Stormbringer saga but the rest is pretty much exactly as I remember it.

demos606 wrote:

killgore wrote:

Keldane wrote:If your character is a blond-haired, blue-eyed, brooding, self-hating, redemption-obsessed man who wears full plate mail and wields a gigantic two-handed sword, you're not fooling me.

You would me!
??????

Elric? I can't swear to the blue eyes as it's been some years since I last read the original Stormbringer saga but the rest is pretty much exactly as I remember it.

actually it sounds like a char from Soul Calibur to me...
Eliric is a brooding, self-hating, redemption-obsessed albino with dark hair who wields an evil black soul-sucking rune short sword.

Most Elric art shows white hair not dark. As an albino dark hair is stupidly unlikely and his albinism is why I couldn't swear to blue eyes. Stormbringer is a gigantic two-handed demonic soul drinking runesword so the initial description fits it reasonably well. Could be a character from any number of video games as well but the first inspiration for that character description in my mind was Elric.

Elric's got white hair and red eyes - and I don't think he ever wears full plate armour. He's definitely talking about a different character.

Very first book when they smash the barbarian fleet Elric is in what amounts to full plate armor. Granted, it's not his standard atire but for combat he knows is coming it's the order of the day. You are right however about the red eyes and that does disqualify Elric from this particular rip off.

demos606 wrote:Most Elric art shows white hair not dark. As an albino dark hair is stupidly unlikely and his albinism is why I couldn't swear to blue eyes. Stormbringer is a gigantic two-handed demonic soul drinking runesword so the initial description fits it reasonably well. Could be a character from any number of video games as well but the first inspiration for that character description in my mind was Elric.

considering the source material I question imagery of Stormbringer as a 2 handed sword...
the eternal champion series runs full circle and we get to see the creation of Stormbringer and Mournblade. They are 2 halves of a larger sword that was broken in one of the books in the EC series (a John Dahker novel IIRC The Dragon in the Sword.)
(for those that are unaware Elric is but one of many Eternal Champions; albeit the most widely recognized.)

is there a list of these eternal champions somewhere?

KillWatch wrote:is there a list of these eternal champions somewhere?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_Champion
wiki page...

Once I had a player who loved aliens (from Aliens). He drew them night and day. And me and a few friends got him to play Rifts.

He wanted to play an alien like that, but of course xenomorphs are not 'party friendly'.

So we sat down with Sourcebook 1 (before the E+R, this was in 1993) and made him an Archie robot (the character didn't know where he came from), that looked like an alien, but with 4 arms (2 small ones and 2 normal ones) and I think ion guns mounted on the shoulders. Hagon/Archie were inspired by the original movie, Archie had in his database. The robot/alien had a great jovial personality. I think his name was Zippy. But besides the guns and 2 extra arms, looked exactly like a xenomorph. But the 'twist' was nice and cool so no problems.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

demos606 wrote:Most Elric art shows white hair not dark. As an albino dark hair is stupidly unlikely and his albinism is why I couldn't swear to blue eyes. Stormbringer is a gigantic two-handed demonic soul drinking runesword so the initial description fits it reasonably well. Could be a character from any number of video games as well but the first inspiration for that character description in my mind was Elric.

considering the source material I question imagery of Stormbringer as a 2 handed sword...
the eternal champion series runs full circle and we get to see the creation of Stormbringer and Mournblade. They are 2 halves of a larger sword that was broken in one of the books in the EC series (a John Dahker novel IIRC The Dragon in the Sword.)
(for those that are unaware Elric is but one of many Eternal Champions; albeit the most widely recognized.)

While each is capable of being wielded one-handed, the vast majority of the combat descriptions I remember of Elric wielding Stormbringer are as a two-handed weapon. The noted excepted to this is the final battle in which he needs the shield to protect himself from the Chaos Lords auras.

demos606 wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

demos606 wrote:Most Elric art shows white hair not dark. As an albino dark hair is stupidly unlikely and his albinism is why I couldn't swear to blue eyes. Stormbringer is a gigantic two-handed demonic soul drinking runesword so the initial description fits it reasonably well. Could be a character from any number of video games as well but the first inspiration for that character description in my mind was Elric.

considering the source material I question imagery of Stormbringer as a 2 handed sword...
the eternal champion series runs full circle and we get to see the creation of Stormbringer and Mournblade. They are 2 halves of a larger sword that was broken in one of the books in the EC series (a John Dahker novel IIRC The Dragon in the Sword.)
(for those that are unaware Elric is but one of many Eternal Champions; albeit the most widely recognized.)

While each is capable of being wielded one-handed, the vast majority of the combat descriptions I remember of Elric wielding Stormbringer are as a two-handed weapon. The noted excepted to this is the final battle in which he needs the shield to protect himself from the Chaos Lords auras.

I always attributed that to the general weakness of Elric. (without the soul eating/strength sharing of Stormbringer he required drugs/herbs to survive.)

Rogue_Scientist wrote:There is nothing new under the sun.

This statement is true and correct in every sense.

Especially in a class-based system. They already have to pick an OCC, so that is a copy. Their personalities are not original, as we have percieved every mindset a person can possibly have, and have labelled every emotion there is to experience.

That they thought what's his face was cool does not deny the fact that he is (himself) a rip-off of another character, who is no doubt a rip-off of yet another character, all the way down the line to the beginning of humanity.

So are their characters rip-offs? Yes. Are they inspired? Yes. Are they emulating a concept? Yes; they did pick the most "rogue-y" OCC there was (available) after all.

The real question is, does it bother you that you can identify the progenitor of their fandom?
What I mean by this is; does that make Altaïr Ibn La-Ahad synonymous with Drizzt Do'Urden?

If the answer is yes, then they need to know that. If the answer is no, then play ball.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

demos606 wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

demos606 wrote:Most Elric art shows white hair not dark. As an albino dark hair is stupidly unlikely and his albinism is why I couldn't swear to blue eyes. Stormbringer is a gigantic two-handed demonic soul drinking runesword so the initial description fits it reasonably well. Could be a character from any number of video games as well but the first inspiration for that character description in my mind was Elric.

considering the source material I question imagery of Stormbringer as a 2 handed sword...
the eternal champion series runs full circle and we get to see the creation of Stormbringer and Mournblade. They are 2 halves of a larger sword that was broken in one of the books in the EC series (a John Dahker novel IIRC The Dragon in the Sword.)
(for those that are unaware Elric is but one of many Eternal Champions; albeit the most widely recognized.)

While each is capable of being wielded one-handed, the vast majority of the combat descriptions I remember of Elric wielding Stormbringer are as a two-handed weapon. The noted excepted to this is the final battle in which he needs the shield to protect himself from the Chaos Lords auras.

I always attributed that to the general weakness of Elric. (without the soul eating/strength sharing of Stormbringer he required drugs/herbs to survive.)

That could be part of it but the strength Stormbringer imparts is phenominal so I generally attribute it to the bloodlust Elric routinely suffers during close combat.

a knee jerk reaction to the carbon copy char would to rip up the char sheet.

When I make a char inspired by something other char from somewhere else, I make sure to build in a "no this is not that char that inspired me"

But then again I can count on one hand how many times I've made a char close to what I've seen elsewhere.

The closest I've come is to make NS forms that mimic very closely a couple mecha from SDF:Macross (a valkaree morphus using custum features and the NS main book, and a SDF-1 morphus using mostly the NS main and R20).

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:...a SDF-1 morphus using mostly the NS main and R20).

You've made nightbane that can turn into the SDF-1?

technically it could happen anywhere

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... image&cd=1

Some of these images make it look like a claymore

KillWatch wrote:when I first read about the CS I thought christian coalition for obvous and less obvious reasons

First time I read the CS, I didn't think much of anything wrong with them. I wasn't much into fantasy at the time so I saw nothing wrong with a group who hated dwarves, and elves and dragons and magic. Intolerant at worse.

I can see the defense of earth, but they are species-centric. Not even just species-centric though, they are hypocritical, employing the use of mutant animals, becuase they are dogs and man's best friend they are ok.

And robots? Are you kidding me? ARCHIE is SO going to take over the coalition and kill all "life", I mean it;s so obvious that these people have not seen Terminator

gadrin wrote:Well very few RPGers are totally original.

I'm 100% original, baby.

Neorealist wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:...a SDF-1 morphus using mostly the NS main and R20).

You've made nightbane that can turn into the SDF-1?

for a size reference....

Hight--5'5"[9'6"]
Weight- 178lb[1780lb]

So the Nightspawn does not turn into a lifesized SDF-1, but more a scaled down sdf-1 (L,DYR)


Number of times I've played him: 0

Fair enough, just figured i'd ask; since the main cannon seems a bit much for most campaigns, presumably you scaled that down considerably as well?

ZorValachan wrote:Once I had a player who loved aliens (from Aliens). He drew them night and day. And me and a few friends got him to play Rifts.

He wanted to play an alien like that, but of course xenomorphs are not 'party friendly'.

So we sat down with Sourcebook 1 (before the E+R, this was in 1993) and made him an Archie robot (the character didn't know where he came from), that looked like an alien, but with 4 arms (2 small ones and 2 normal ones) and I think ion guns mounted on the shoulders. Hagon/Archie were inspired by the original movie, Archie had in his database. The robot/alien had a great jovial personality. I think his name was Zippy. But besides the guns and 2 extra arms, looked exactly like a xenomorph. But the 'twist' was nice and cool so no problems.

now that's funny

Neorealist wrote:Fair enough, just figured i'd ask; since the main cannon seems a bit much for most campaigns, presumably you scaled that down considerably as well?

If you have Rifter 20 then look it up. otherwise the answer is that it is no where near as powerfull as the read SDF-1's.