Can I invite my friend to the game?

>thinking character arcs are a bad idea and something new

Do you enjoy being retarded?

I miss good bait threads

Can you explain what a character arc is?

Is it just a story centred around her?

Yes. You can always tell the player fuck you and change it.

In an RPG context, its usually that personal quest that you stick in your backstory in the hopes that the GM does something with it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_arc

Yes, you do enjoy it.

So basically it is "hey I'm such a snowflake that not only a person created a place for my character to adventure in but also the same guy has to create a tailored adventure for me"

Such wankery, self masturbatory bullshit.

>What the fuck is wrong with millenials nowadays
You mean basically anyone old enough to post on this board? Or are you like 40?

It means having the story center around her character for a time, yes. It typically involves the following:

>the story becomes about the character, revolving around some theme or event that the player thinks is key to them
>GM is expected to waive the usual rules if it furthers the completion of the arc
>GM is expected to introduce the elements that the player wants
>GM is strongly discouraged from no-blocking
>the player has to be satisfied that they've taken the arc to its conclusion before it can end
>the usual rules of player agency for the other players are suspended, they're expected to play along with the character arc to make it work

Once the arc is ended then usually another player starts their character arc.

I'm 29, I consider millennials to be people younger than 25.

Lots of ignorami think 'millenials' means people born after 2000. They don't realize it refers to people born in the 1980s and is synonymous with Generation Y.

Are you trolling? Or is this a "normal" thing among youngsters? Holy shit now I understand why people complain about Mercer ruining D&D.

You are wrong.

Guess what? You're a millennial.

I don't know if it's normal among youngsters, it's normal for an RPG character arc though. Ivory tower game design. Casuals in the hobby. Involuntary celibacy.

Ah, so you didn't actually want to know what it was, you just wanted to wank off a little about how amazing his characters are because they don't do anything.

In case you're not baiting, these things are usually to give the DM some nice plot hook ideas. There's no obligation on the DM's part to do anything with it, but its something the character may be interested in working on long-term.

Actually anyone born past 2000 is considered Gen Z, millenials are those born in the 90s

Yes, it's the way a character grows and changes within the context and events of the wider narrative.

It is NOT in fact what and claim it is. A Character ARC (there is no H and its' triggering the grammer Nazi in me) is a reflexive look at the way the character has grown, changed, or been molded by the events of the narrative or story they are involved in. It does not in fact mean having the story centered around any character whatsoever, which would be a subplot or secondary story arc within the wider narrative.

For further reading see the wikipedia page here:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_arc
or pass basic high-school English at roughly 9th-10th grade level.

To summarize: a STORY arc is the events in the story, the independent variable for you math-minded folks out there. A CHARACTER arc is the way in which a character changes in reaction to the story arc, or the dependent variable.

A. Say fuck you and be that guy DM

B. Work with the player to better fit it in your world.

C. Just play it out.

This is the play telling you what she wants to play instead of sitting in your LOTR rip off story. Pro dms don't even make storys and let the players do it.

I was born in 89. So I am not a millennial.

>millenials are those born in the 90s
There isn't a new generation every 10 years unless you think children having sex and giving birth at like 7 is normal

You certainly aren't Gen X

I was also and Im a millennial.

I don't like how you misspelled "millennials".

Otherwise, you have the makings of a pretty decent pasta here. A little heavy, but at this time of year that can be a good thing. My favorite part is how you used "mash" instead of "mesh". I also enjoy the use of "arch" instead of "arc", although I question why you would substitute that ingredient, because if your female player (imaginary) really watched Critical Role, she would know how to correctly pronounce arc, even if she didn't know how to spell it. I actually haven't ever watched Critical Role because the idea of wasting time watching people play games instead of using that time to actually play games baffles me. If that's how someone pronounces it on CR then you can disregard that comment.

Also, you misspelled "achieve"; you should fix that before your next repost or else it might draw attention away from the meat.

You ever watch a TV show where the episodes don't explicitly further the overarching plot, but has a character deal with their issues, overcome a personal goal and grow as a character? That's what a Character Arc is. How much of a retard are you that you can't glimmer what a character arc is when given the name OR google it

I'm starting to think this isn't even bait.

What a shitty thread

Lets go positives and negatives:
Positives: she actually made a background for you to work with, took the time to learn mechanics and get into the games.

Negatives: she's extremely demanding with that timetable. I do character arcs when they fit, you don't force them. She needs to be told that.

Tell her straight out that she isn't going to like our game. There is no need to derail your campaign just because she wants you to focus on her character.

Wrong.

Yes you are.

You know, both your OP and your confusion over this term could have easily been fixed by simply LOOKING UP THE TERMS YOURSELF. Lazy fucking retard.

>What the fuck do I do Veeky Forums?
Kick him out.

I'll take shit that didn't happen for 400!

It depends on the group's style. D&D traditionally pushed roleplaying in the sense that you are interacting with the world from the perspective of your character, rather than improv theatre crap. She clearly expects the latter, so set the record straight and explain to her how your game is run.

This bait but for any sperg out there reading this is not how to react. If you want people to stop being "bad" at role playing then you work with them and he'll them to understand not every campaign is CR style. Some people may play that way but if you do not then be upfront and explain that. Tell them you prefer a different approach and do not guarantee a character arc at anytime if it doesn't fit with he type of game everyone has agreed to.

Bitching and moaning on a Mongolian BBQ sauce enthusiast forum does nothing to solve the problem you have.

>since when as a player you describe what your character has to acchieve and create NPCs and force the DM to create an adventure based around you

I mean, 'force' is a retarded way to put it, but since always? A decade of roleplaying may not be a lot compared to the grognards of Veeky Forums, but with every DM I have ever had it has been clear that your characters are part of the world and you are expected to contribute story towards it

Is this where the "Write a book instead" meme comes in?

I am not railroading them, I present a playground and they play in it. They do not bring their baggage and ideas and create another playground next to it that I have to direct for their fulfilment.

Why can't you write the story in your game? Work with the players.

>(the other being the ability to use complicated tools)
Do you mean like thumbs?

>They do not bring their baggage and ideas

>players can't bring ideas to my game

That may just be the most retarded statement I've heard this year

No, most species of apes and monkeys have thumbs but only a limited number of more intelligent varieties use tools, but thumbs certainly do help in environmental manipulation and the usage of those tools

>Why are the players trying to make the game about THEM?

You have never been a DM and you should never be a DM.

It is about THEM exploring MY world.

Not about backseat DMing telling me what to put in it, how to resolve it, when to resolve it because they are unique snowflakes that everything has to be revolve around them.

No, it's about all of you building and exploring a world together. As others said, go write a fucking book instead so it can flop on the kindle store.

Why do you keep talking about me writing a book? My games are not railroady and are usually sandbox style game.

Not because I won't write a whole character arch where you can meet your lost brother where everything revolves around you it doesn't mean that we are not building a world together, their characters can influence the world.

You're not only a terrible GM, OP, you're also a terrible human being. Or, at least, you would be if you were ever either of those things.

Fuck you OP. I want to throat punch you right now. Your bitching about character story driven players and I get faggot that make fart jokes and meme references through the whole game.

I hope you kill yourself

People run their games in different ways man. Not everyone is into character driven deals. Just look at how OSR games are typically run.

I read somewhere that humans' hands are better developed for grip and fine manipulation. Shorter fingers, fattier pads, and larger muscles controlling the thumb.

[spolier]sage[/spoiler]

This. I am an OSR player who recently started playing 5e.

All the faggotry of being a special snowflake that everything has to be magic, special and catter to the player so they can feel like the absolute center of the universe is not my style.

Also have you tried not playing with teenagers?

Also note that the character is named "bazinga"

Contrived bullshit thread?
Contrived bullshit thread.

Honestly it sounds like a shit GM.
My GM was all
>provide a backstory
>family members, childhood, hobbies, etc
>why are they an adventurer instead of working a farm/ running the family business/ etc
>what are their goals?

Frankly, if you're not letting your players develop their characters through RP, you're a shit GM.

It's more common than you'd think. I've seen a lot of DMs (and players) think that a character having built in adventure hooks or god forbid personal goals is the player demanding undue attention and screen time and is something that should be punished. I've had several DMs monkey's paw what I felt were fairly reasonable character goals and motivations as a way to say "fuck you, you do the quest I hand out and nothing else"

I keep forgetting how boring most nerds are, in the end.

...

I have been glad to make some parts of my current campaign put certain characters in the spotlight sometimes. But they also never explicitly asked for or expected it, and I don't think I will run every future game that way.

Also just talk like an adult etc etc. If someone's else expects something different than you want to run, you tell them.

Nowadays, I always make sure to include at least one man/woman my character is deeply in love with, or at least questing for.

It's a good litmus test for both player/DM quality, since I've actually suffered the nightmare that is a sympathetic DM versus a PC that's unreasonably enraged at the idea my character not only has a wife, but seems awfully loyal and affectionate towards her.

Good quality bait thread OP, you should be proud.

>player want a session that isnt just murderhobos
>OMGWTFSNOWFLAKEMILLENIALS

I don't know how you run your games, but she would fit in my games so long as she understands that I'll heed her suggestions but things might not exactly go her way. The players create the content, I just build around what they bring to the table, fill in the blanks, and arbitrate the rules. If she runs into conflict, it'll be against the other players, I just mediate so everyone has fun.

>Complains about "grammer"
>Can't spell the word properly or contract "it is" coherently.

The best D&D player I currently DM for got into the hobby solely from Critical Role.

After like 6 months he is the best RP'er, the best player (In terms of actual skill and knowing the game), and functioned and his group healer AND tank (Wew Grave Cleric with decent CON & Tough feat) in a successful Tomb of Annihilation game I did not hold back during.

I’m not sure you are aware of how old millennials are

You literally could not be more squarely in the millennial generation.

>DM constantly says he loves roleplay heavy games
>keeps putting us against bandits or other ruffians attacking people
>never any plot points aside from go here and kill that
>complains our characters are murderhobos

The term Murderhobo has lost all meaning in this hobby.

There seem to be two sides here
The side of OP, where he whines about something instead of talking to the player about what HE expects from a campaign. (Something the DM can and should do.)

And the side of people who think OP's a whiny bitch, but forget to also point out he has a bit of a point - his player is a whiny bitch too. Ignoring that the description of her is probably a caricature.

I posit thusly, you're both whiny bitches. Maybe explain to her that you aren't going to center the campaign around her, but willing to consider throwing stuff in for her character when it comes time.

This.

Tell her I don't play with whiny Critical role fanboys/fangirls/elitists and kick them out.

>The best D&D player
>My bitch who does what I want.

Yeah, pretty low quality bait to be honest.

...Anyway, I look forward to the next CR campaign!

The point of the latter is that the whole thing seems contrived.
I have seen more than my fair share of players who expect everything to happen in a couple of sessions. I have also seen different players that expect to have a whole 4 months of sessions planned around them.
But the OP has used a number of things that seem very particular in creating the worst player imaginable and has posted it in its own thread seeking conformation that this 'player' he has is a sack of shit.
If it was a real thing, this would more than likely be posted as a "DM problems" thread, or a "that guy" thread. At the very least it would be a foot note of a post in /5eg/ or /pfg/. Instead he seeks attention otherwise.
If OP is half the DM he makes himself out to be then he would already know how to solve the problem by either sitting down with the player and reasoning with them or just telling them to piss off. So the thread is pointless from the start and just seems like some bait made from a person who doesn't like popular things so that he can appear popular himself.
Go figure.

Roll with it. Maybe you both could learn from each other.

Millennials usually refer to people born somewhere between 1980-1995, tough it varies somewhat between definitions

To call this low effort would be an insult to every lazy person in the world.

I've never watched a single episode of Critical Role but, uh, user, other than her expecting things to move way faster than they otherwise would, none of that is particularly unreasonable.

I make sure that all of my players have some personal goal they wish to achieve and then weave their individual "quest" or "arc" into the overall story I'm telling. It seems that she wants a more hands-on approach then I'd usually go for (my players usually just give me a rough idea of what they seek to achieve, and then I work from there) but since you don't already know the person, this at least makes things easier for you. Hell, her idea of a "session 0" centered around introducing her character to the group and seeing if everything meshes well while also weaving her "narrative" into the party's is how I handle most new party additions if I'm doing an ongoing campaign.

I think the general disconnect here is that, just as you put it, you're more into the "dungeon, adventure in front of you, solving puzzles" approach to tabletop gaming, or at least D&D in particular. Which is a perfectly fine approach to playing the game if that's what your players like. I've DMed my share of "just make some characters and let's do some dungeon delving" and it's always been fun in its own right. But for a lot of people, myself included more often than not as a DM, is the collaborative narrative aspect.

This player clearly wants something more in the vein of a collaborative narrative rather than just straight dungeon delving. She might just not be a good fit for your party if you're doing the latter more so than the former.

It's always weird seeing people in their mid-thirties lumped into the millenial demographic. Makes it apparent that some just use it as a catch-all term for "Anyone under 40 that doesn't match with my social/political beliefs 100%"

Terms like millennial, 90s kid, etc. are pretty pointless desu. They rarely have decent definitions and there are shitload of people who'll identify with whatever period ID happens to be popular at the moment.
>i was born december 31th 11:55PM 1999, i'm such a 90s kid lol

Millenial has never not meant “generation starting with those that reached 18 around the millennium”

It’s almost like there is sustained efforts to cloud the judgement of the over 40 crowd that seem to be paying off.

Millennial is pretty flexible term, some people think that people born during late-70s are millennials, then there those that claim that people born in 2005 are also millennials.

critical roles gave unrealistic expectations to normies about ttrpg. i hate that show.

There is not actually anything at all about the prospective player being whiny about anything in the OP. Which only makes the entire thing bait-ier.

Be upfront with her about how unreasonable her demands are. Kind of a red flag and let's hope she can adjust her attitude.

If she reacts well to you, all's good and you can test her out. If she melts down and says she is not joining, then you avoided a mistake.

Either way, you win by being direct.

Also, it's often fun to let players build up a backstory with NPC's. As a DM, I find it can help you enrich your world. The great thing to do in these cases is to *subvert* her expectations based on the backstory she built up.

>princess of elven kingdom, knows it like the back of her hand, historically there was a demonic cult eradicated there

Then when she proceeds to go home in the game, maybe make it so something is not quite afoot in the kingdom - it's different somehow from what she described. Not all is right with the realm - maybe that demonic cult never was really destroyed and now has the royal family under their influence.

Rich character backstories are not inherently a bad thing.

i agree. i love it when players give me a good backstory. im 99% sure the OPs story is fake, but i bring backstory in between "chapters" when i want to pad things out and don't have alot of ideas for hooks. Entrapping a characters backstory into a hook (because, i mean, the character will just HAVE to go if you drop a big enough breadcrumb) and have a "clue" or hook somewhere along in that little side adventure makes it really easy and rewarding. Throw a small twist in and boom, its a happy player and the party is back on track. all you need is to have a bit of emotional depth and understanding of your player (which by the time you're doing this, you should if you arnt full blown autistic) and your party will be talking about it for years to come.

>Critical Role

>See that Elven Captain? She’s tough and strong
>See that human girl? She’s tough and strong
>See that other human girl? She’s tough and strong
>See that little gnome? She’s the toughest and strongest here
>See that evil woman? She’s actually the tough and strong one in the relationship!

Meanwhile...

>See that Satyr? He’s obnoxious and quirky. Laugh at him!
>See that old man? He’s obnoxious and quirky. Laugh at him!
>See that cartographer? He’s obnoxious and quirky. Laugh at him!

It’s all so tiresome.

Matt does have an issue with this, but I do feel you're overblowing it a tad. A lot of the villains were male, and they were all pretty badass.

Matt definitely does have a stronk womyn fetish though.

Also they all have their hair 'pulled back into a really tight bun'. Like, all of them. Its ridiculous.

looking at who owns/runs G&S its understandable. i wouldn't be suprised if half the deal to get the show/funding was to make the environment more inviting to women and having a few "really tight bun" stronk women isn't that big of a price all in all. Hell, i fall into giving NPC's i pull out of my ass mid session similar characteristics. they'll either be shifty/quirky/strong and honorable/or meek. I've noticed i do this too.

It’s true, I’ve noticed a huge influx of female players on Roll20 and like 75% of them say they watched Critical Role.

Still, he’s got a clear fetish for strong women and it kind of gets very hamfisted when every single woman we meet is strong, powerful and in control while the men are these quirky, comical characters. It’s not an issue, but it’s something I notice.

The only problem I have with it is that stronk women stop being impressive. The first time they met Kima I thought 'ha, this character is alright'
When they started meeting Kima over and over again in different bodies it started to wear on me. Its understandable, but I hope he shakes things up a bit for the next campaign.