Veeky Forums, I am playing a male human bard in a D&D game and have been told to stop roleplaying

Don't judge Veeky Forums by the worst of us.

Play a bard who's in love with his instrument and art

My bard is a stringent academic. His rigid recitation of poetry and ancient histories is enough to dry up any woman in the room.

He also tends to stay away from female company, as a lifetime reading through the canon has shown that women are more often than not a corrupting influence.

...

First off, way to pull off probably the least interesting and most overused bard trope possible.

If your party didn't discuss what kind of characters and themes you're all cool with before the game, all of you are fucking stupid, and unless somebody directly informs you that you're making them way too uncomfortable you're technically in the clear. That said, there is sort of a general level of curtesy you should show in public unless you're with a close colloquial circle. It doubds like your group aren't exactly friends with you like that, so while you're okay for now, from the outside that sort of behavior doesn't come off as you being comfortable or confident with that shit, so much as looking overly-compensatory in the same way an old man on a loud harley or a ritch boy in revving daddy's car does.

Long story short: you sound really uncreative and socially unaware. You might be That Guy.

He isn't, he is judging us by the majority here.

>bards acting like bards

You fell into the meme trap OP, just because you play an instrument doesn't mean you should turn into a That Guy faget and fuck everything in sight. But regardless of your faggotry it doesn't sound like you are the only one at fault. The rest of your group sounds like they just want to play an MMORPG or some shit with nothing but level progression and loot being their sole purpose for playing which is even worse imo.

The only option would be to leave if you are actually trying to rp a character in groups like this as your thought out plans and intentional fuck-ups at times due to backstory/faults will be met with "Fuck it, I'll just hit the guy lol" or other table-talk out-of-character garbage. Even if you made your character into a walking cliche there would more have likely been times where, in a group that gives half a shit, you would be able to flesh them out a bit more other than "the bard that sleeps with everything" or what your current group seems to be going with, the buff slut.

>he is judging us by the majority here.

That's still the worst, user.

Whether or not you want your bard to be seductive, A: you should fade to black rather than going into details and B: if you're in public, you keep it in your pants.

That's an exaggeration. Stop putting undo weight behind loud trolls.

We can't ALL be the worst, user.

Seriously, enough. The larger Veeky Forums community is hardly as bad as you're trying to make it out to be, and it's likely just you hoping that there's more people as dumb as you are to help you feel more comfortable acting like an idiot.

Quit it.

Daily reminder Veeky Forums doesn't play games.

Does DMing a game on Roll20 every Friday for the last four months count as playing? Barring two weeks when I was without a computer due to a dead HDD and one week I was too sick to sit upright.

YesIt's mostly a stick about people who IF they've played have only played in games that lasted like a session and a half.

Nothing you can do but find a new game or change, OP. Everyone here in this thread is being a retarded little white knight, but the fact of the matter is that games are collaborative, and if the other players don't like something you're doing you gotta stop if you want to keep playing.

>Three random posts
>Nobody on Veeky Forums plays games
Stop drinking gasoline user

Nothing gets me harder then a good goblin slaying.

Spent 20 minutes trying to figure out how to post this. Thanks, user.

Rule 1 of playing with other people? Don't make the rest of your group uncomfortable.
If you do find you make your group uncomfortable either stop or, if you can't do that because of your "artistic integrity", find a new group that is comfortable with your playing style.

tldr; leave your magical realm at home if the other players aren't ok with it.

If it makes your group very uncomfortable find a different group or don't do it
And frankly you're in public so stop being openly weirdly sexual

>womanizer bard

What, were "generic brown-haired male fighter", "slutty female rogue in corset", and "wise half-elven druid" already taken?

>tldr; my group are flustered by bards acting like bards
In your little fantasy world, maybe.

Bardslut is, was and will only ever be a Veeky Forums meme

Why couldn't you just play a fun boastful bard who doesn't make people uncomfortable? Just because you're an underwear moistening wordsmith doesn't entitle you to wag your sullied tongue at any comely lass. You can lie and pretend you're the most heroic person in the party in front of NPCs, but acting like a womanizer is like rolling a lulrandumb chaotic evil rouge.

>Being a womanizer is trait on the same level as indiscriminate murder
Where do you get your moral system from?

It's the same level of disruptive and annoying bullshit, not the question of which one is more or less evil.

But, you already knew that, and you're just hoping to pad up this dumb thread.

It's just childish and disruptive. In context, clearly the murderhobo is worse. In the meta, you're both giant douches I wouldn't want to table top with.

I got you the first time.

It's only disruptive if the party isn't fine with it. It's not inherently immoral and wrong to play a womanizer. You can have your opinions on this style of play, but don't pretend they extend to everyone.

>it's a MAYMAY

If you think a bard, or pretty much any high charisma character hitting on people makes them a wierdo you are a sexually stunted puritan and possibly retarded.
No one is asking to describe sex in detail here.

>It's not inherently immoral and wrong to play a womanizer
I would argue that it is, because being a womanizer implies manipulating women to get what you want without caring while dehumanizing said women into objects.

Now, ethical theory aside, if you're play group's fine with it, that's fine, but the vast majority of people will not be fine if it's something that's consistent and distracting. Why should we all have to sit through your awkward word-groping when I just want to hit things with my axe and go on an adventure?

...

>inherently

True. But, you're hoping for a bit too much subjectivity to excuse what's generally considered poor play. It may not be inherently wrong, but it's still wrong.

It all comes down to the golden rule. You might enjoy playing a womanizer, but imagine how much fun it is for the rest of the group.

I can only imagine one scenario where a womanizer character would be welcomed by the group, and that's when they're low charisma, rather than high, and played for the handful of laughs that come out of their frequent failures.

>I would argue that it is
You would argue playing a fictional character that doesn't ascribe to your absolute real life morality is immoral?

>Dehumanizing women into objects
>For hitting on them
Knew you were a feminist. Sucks that your kind has infested this board.

>The vast majority of people...
Do not know you exist let alone wish for you to speak for them.

>generally
No. You don't like it. That's all it is. You cannot speak for everyone else and make statements like this.

>It's still wrong
Because you don't like it. Making an objective moral statement is not within your authority.

>Imagine how much fun it is for the rest of the group.
This is something that will vary from group to group. Your statements cannot apply to all groups.

>You would argue playing a fictional character that doesn't ascribe to your absolute real life morality is immoral?
Yup I would. You can do immoral actions, but being a womanizer is immoral, strictly speaking. Having a pragmatic and utilitarian view of people in general can be construed as immoral, on the basis that you're denying an individual or group the dignity they deserve as sentient agents capable of their own actions. In fact, it's a mutually expected dignity in order to have a successfully functioning society. If you're Lance Thundercock, you can probably get away with being a womanizer on the basis that self-gratification is more important than constructed societal processes, but it's still immoral because as Lance Thundercock you want people to respect your dignity in turn. By acting out as a womanizer, you're basically jerking yourself off in front of a group of people, otherwise you'd act like that in real life and apply a different label to yourself. Or, treat others the way you would want to be treated and how you think they would want to be treated, otherwise what you're doing is probably wrong.

>Knew you were a feminist. Sucks that your kind has infested this board.
I'm not a "feminist", I'm a meritocratic egalitarian, which means I recognize each individual as a capable rational actor equivalent to myself, until they prove otherwise. Just because I think people deserve mutual respect doesn't mean I'm some hipster, I just have a clear understanding of what's right and what's wrong, relative to my experiences. Just because you can tell moral from immoral doesn't mean you have to always act morally or immorally, sometimes acting pragmatically requires a little bloodshed.

On the other hand, being a douchecannoe with a group of people who are clearly uncomfortable by your flamboyant dickitry means that you shouldn't play with those people because they don't share your interests or world view.

No. It's fucked.

What used to be the best board is now overrun with blue-haired pronoun police, spergs, /pol/niggers and /d/eviants.

While Veeky Forums appears to be going through a phase lately, OP, don't let it worry you. As long as you tactfully fade to black any sexual encounters and don't bring any fetishes in the discussion, you're doing absolutely nothing wrong. A stereotyped bard is just that, stereotype bard, neither good nor bad. If you're roleplaying him as well as you say, it's a fine character to do.
However, the fact remains that you're not playing D&D by yourself for yourself. Either find a better group, or conform to the standards of the other players.

>12 year old goth loli satyr.

I can't tell if he was lying to us or just himself.

Why, I play in a group that des that kind of shit all the time. As much as Veeky Forums will get #triggered about it.

>Yup I would.
Then you're incapable of separating fiction from reality and you don't belong on the internet, let alone in the play pretend board. And because of that, there's really nothing more to debate. You are insane, and thus incapable of being convinced, because to you this is a defense of real people and real actions, not of a character in a fictional game.

>Veeky Forums appears to be going through a phase lately
All of fucking society is. Our only hope is that it dies out like the hippies did.

>this meta-level shitpost after being BTFO
I was trying to have a passive aggressive discussion with you about ethics, then you decided to go "a bloo bloo you're crazy" instead of contributing anything meaningful, or explaining why I was incorrect.

We get het up about it because so often, it's the local /d/tards putting on a show. If you don't want to be lumped in with those jackoffs, don't act like one. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, asshat.

You made the declaration that it is immoral for someone to create a fictional character that you would consider immoral. That's not something a sane person would say.

>le bards fuck everything meem
DnD was a mistake

>Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, asshat.
I'll play whatever games me and my group want to, you literally cannot stop us senpai.

Generic is nowhere near the same thing as bad, though. Not every Drow has to be a fucking CG rebel trying to throw away his kin's reputation, not every Paladin has to be an alcoholic jerk Knight in Sour Armor, and most of the "imaginative" race/class combos you can think are one-trick ponies or plain dysfunctional as characters.
Don't knock stereotypes- they exist for a reason.

>I would argue that being a womanizer implies manipulating women to get what you want without caring while dehumanizing said women into objects

And I would argue that your argument holds less water than a volcanic rock in the middle of the Sahara desert on a midsummer noon. Strictly "being a womaniser' implies none of these things.

Who are you?
What makes you think that your bizarre, minority opinions are anything beyond bizarre, minority opinions?

You're right in that there are some minority groups that would tolerate such a player, but that's not something that's immediately known, and even then it takes quite some time for people to get comfortable enough around each other to allow someone to act like that.

That makes it terrible to advise people that it's a generally good conduct. If you already know your group is comfortable with that sort of thing and won't hate you for it, you probably are not going to be going around asking for advice on whether or not it's a good idea.

What? I have a logical process for ethical thought, why wouldn't a fictional character that does immoral things be immoral? Are you retarded? Sure, you can still do it and have fun, but living out power escapist power fantasies contrary to your own moral system is either an exercise in applied ethics, or something some douche on the internet does to try and seem smart for strangers. If you're implying that I think it's immoral for people to do whatever they want, did you read any of my rant? I don't care whether it's morally correct or not outside of arbitrary signification for personal benefit. What I care about is that I respect people's capacity to make informed decisions and do whatever they want. If someone wants to do heroin, sure, let them if it makes them happy. That's their business. If someone's heroin addiction is impacting me, then it's my business and I can apply all the moral faggotry to them that I want. If someone's heroin addiction is impacting lots of people, it may be more prudent to tell them to stop doing heroin. The whole point is that it's semi-relativistic felicity calculus for practical self-maximization in a group setting, without objectively looking like a dick.

From the first result on google
"Womaniser" (n):
a man who behaves selfishly in his sexual relationships with women. masher, skirt chaser, wolf, woman chaser. a man who is aggressive in making amorous advances to women. Type of: debauchee, libertine, rounder. a dissolute person; usually a man who is morally unrestrained.

That's pretty negative. I didn't say anything about ladies behavior that may or may not justify males behavior, but the general descriptor of the word is distinctly negative, and describing yourself as such is equally negative. "Stud" accomplishes the same thing without referencing manipulation or devious intent.

>minority
Where's your information backing up who is and is not in the minority?

It's status as a positive or negative characteristic (which is subjective anyway) is not in discussion here, just the fact that it has nothing to do with manipulation, dehumanization or objectification of women. More accurately, it has absolutely nothing to do with one's treatment of women at all, merely one's own reaction to them.

You didn't read what said. You declared the person PLAYING the character as immoral, which, if not outright insanity, does indicate that have a problem separating what happens in the game with what happens outside it. The player of the mass-murdering Blackguard is no more or less immoral than his cousin who plays the self-sacrificing Paladin.

>of
Tbh if the ladies give themselves up they're just as much in th fault as Lance Thundercock. I doubt they're searching for a lifetime partner to make and grow kids with when they get fucked by him. Most likely they're looking for instant gratification via sex just like Mr Thundercock.

Where did this trope come from anyway? Can we blame big hair rock stars? I love blaming problems on them.

I don't know why everyone is being sensitive little sissies today. If you're right, and all you're doing is flirting, and making a few(pretty bad) one liners, then it's not a big deal. I'm guessing your group is a typical murderhobo party?

It's decided. I'm playing bard. It will be glorious.

it's what Veeky Forums deserves

Report results.

I have played with over a thousand people in hundreds of games, from a wide diversity of backgrounds that would constitute a fair sample size.

That, and I've stepped outside in the last twenty years. I recommend that you try it.

You know the deal, faggot. If you really do it, take pics and post'em.

>Over a thousand people in hundreds of games

You know, I personally don't care if you lie to people on the internet, but you should at least have the dignity to make something up that sounds like it has maybe a 1% chance of being true.

I'll do it for you.

Not all Veeky Forums

39 seconds apart. Interesting.

Never understood this meme. Or "All stories on Veeky Forums are made up."

>openly weirdly sexual
This makes me sad.

It's an established trope outside of Veeky Forums as well. Maybe if you browsed anything other than Veeky Forums you'd know this? And I don't mean reddit or tumblr.

>Being pragmatic is immoral
uwot¿
Also, by your logic, I am completely moral. You see, I treat people like garbage but I don't expect any better treatment in return.

Please let this happen. I am very tired of society of victims.

You getting enough oxygen inbetween smelling your own farts, buddy? You literally contradicted yourself right at the beginning of this post. Twice.
Also being "aggressive" is not inherently bad, unless you follow feminazi theology.

Have you ever even READ a rulebook?

>ACTUALLY BEING that guy who replies to every post in the thread

>replying to that guy who replies to everything in that thread with nothing more than a bitch
>posts consider the following meme without actually making a point
Someone send the paramedics, I'm having an allergic reaction to all this summer.

...

>Never understood this meme.

It's hardly a meme. Take Veeky Forums for example. If anyone on Veeky Forums were actually involved in business, they would be doing business instead of posting on an anonymous imageboard about business. People on Veeky Forums don't actually read or write books because if they did they would be doing those things or talking to their friends who also do those things about those things instead of posting about doing them on an anonymous imageboard.

I have seen anons on Veeky Forums post "no game>game." I'd imagine most fa/tg/uys like playing RPGs or any traditional games at all the same way Roald Dahl liked children: in theory, with every parameter exactly as dictated by their ideals and expectations to the extent that nothing in reality could ever measure up.

>in theory, with every parameter exactly as dictated by their ideals and expectations to the extent that nothing in reality could ever measure up.
This is the part that drives me up the wall so much.

You'd be surprised what playing for 20+ years can do. Hell, it's not even that amazing if you frequent conventions.

So keep the quick tongued, charismatic, dextrous part and just sleep around less. They're not asking you to stop roleplaying, they're asking you to cut out one annoying trait which is not as vital to the bard's identity as you seem to imagine.

...

I'm the head imam of Saudi Arabia. Prepare yourself for the jihad, infidel.

>Playing NE bard
>uses spells to trap people in a hypnotic dance and enchants them to do his bidding when he performs
>gives them memory loss afterwards so there is no loose ends

No one knows my secret

Good luck faggot I live in the depths of central Australia in an abandoned opal mine.

That is pretty retarded. You act like Veeky Forums requires a huge expenditure of time or something. Just because you spend your life on Veeky Forums doesn't mean I do. "If you like doing a thing you would do that thing all the time!" What the fuck even. I have a game every Monday night and Saturday afternoon. Plenty of time to do other shit in the meantime, whether it be Veeky Forums or not.
I have also seen those people who say the best way to enjoy ttrpgs is through making shit up on Veeky Forums and every time they get shot down. That opinion is very much a minority.

This so hard. My bard is a manipulative bitch basically.... For the greater good of course.

It's super likely that while you think your lines are clever you're actually just a cringe-lord who wont stop ERPing with people who don't want it to happen.

Honestly, you should kill yourself.

Party getting killed and you're a bard? Throw your shield into the fray this activating the carefully prepared chain of Oh shit spells enscribed as runes on it.

Thank god for glyph of warding.

How horrendously retarded do you have to be to think that Veeky Forums works as a gigantic time sink and that people can't just go on it for short periods of time?

Probably lying, though if it was over the internet where no one knew him it wouldn't matter much.

I wouldnt play with someone who wanted to run something like that though.

This.
You know, in my 25 years of gaming, I've never started at a tavern, never rescued a princess from a dragon, dealt with the overarching pc stereotypes as they are presented on Veeky Forums.
I haven't because people are so fucking hung up on "not being a stereotype" that they forget that they can make for an engaging and pleasant game, and so skip over things that could be done out of fear when they themselves have never seen or done it.

Other than saving a princess from a dragon I've seen most of the tropes come into play.

I've literally never been in a game where a princess existed in anything more than passing.

And this is... wrong, for some reason?
Maybe I am just a little less eager to scream via text, but I both accept and expect women to seek out sex on their terms and for their pleasure as much as any guy is apt to.
We are all humans, and the difference isn't that grand.

I started in a tavern but not many of the other tropes. Which is a shame because taking a normal village and turning it into a defendable position against a horde of orcs sounds like fun.

Sluts are bad regardless of sex.

I put on my robe and wizard hat.

As a GM, I started the game at taverns (The Purple Wyrm), I had a "horde attacks the city" scenario, I did all the classic shit no one does because of the belief everyone does it when really, no one does, and save for the one faggot who refuses to take the bait and go to the fucking tavern because they need to be different, the party always had fun.

Alright, explain this.
If the people involved aren't spreading disease or creating progeny (whether accidentally or on purpose for underhanded purposes), what is wrong with enjoying sex with someone you are attracted to?

He was told so from a young age. Anything else he says will just be confirmation he stumbled on over the years. Pretty sure mo one has ever grown up with casual sex being great and then realized when they were older all the evils.

Not him, but studies have shown that the more sexual partners you have the worse you'll fare once you actually get married.