More of: What would you do in this situation

[Darth Jerod]

So the other day the group was going over skill lists and coming up with who the best was to handle certain situations and speed up some things. Ok that was fine.

Then out of the blue one of my players made some strange comments about the group. Mostly on the forums we use. Things like. "The group are outcasts of society anyway..." so I started looking at all of the background notes I had trying to find out if the group were all tied to being outcasts.

Then again he mentions that the group are social outcasts based on their skill choices. So I asked him what he meant, I took the bait. All adventurers are social outcasts who do not fit into society because they have skills that set them apart from their home towns. So his way of thinking is if you know the skill religion you know so much it actually alienates you from the average person that they shun you. Same goes for History or Arcana. Any skill for that matter that you train in makes you so out of the ordinary that you can not be a regular part of society.

So my initial reaction was kind of "wow" where is this coming from? It then went into me kind of saying the majority of the characters in the group are not outcasts, that this is a archetype or background for a character. That just having the skills like Religion and History can elevate a person into an important role in their society. Another example I gave was a character who is a shifter who's entire clan was destroyed save him could be viewed as an outcast because he is from the outside and dies not fit into a human culture.

So then it gets a little... real. I get this post from him.

"Adventure - an undertaking usually involving danger and unknown risks

Most societies don't base themselves around adventure. In fact, most adventurers were based upon lower class citizens within society. You know, people who would rather make a name for themselves in the unknown than to live through the mundane drudgery of being part of society."

Would you ignore this players view of the game? I know I did not need the definition of adventure from him, but I had him admit he did not view skills as something that could be tied into a profession like "History - Scholar or Religion - Clergy"

I am trying very hard to grasp his way of thinking. He has kind of admitted to having a completely different take on what is happening in the campaign, which explains how he is viewing certain NPC's and story elements. It is like he is in a different campaign than the rest of the group sometimes. Do I pull him off to the side and ask him what is up? Do I ask the group if they are getting where the campaign is going? Because at this point in the conversation I am a bit confused as to where the disconnect is at.

Everyone is saying they are loving the campaign, there are no changes they would like to see happen yet I am getting this POV from this guy that is contrary to what I am doing.

Need some advice, thanks.

[D'karr]

Well, in a sense the characters are quite outside the norm, not necessarily outcasts but different. They are "heroes" after all. They decide to take on risks that most "average" people would not even consider approaching. Some might do it for money, others for glory, others just for the adventure. The common thing is that all of them ARE taking these risks that are way outside the norm.

This might not be a campaign specific issue but a player perspective issue, and I don't think he is too far off the mark for viewing the characters as different.

As an example think about how Bilbo Baggins was viewed by most other hobbits after he returned to the shire from his adventure at the Lonely Mountain. He was different. Some even thought of him as a troublemaker. No respectable hobbit would ever go out adventuring and he had done so.

From a societal perspective the adventurers are a different breed. I would not call them outcasts, but the definition does not fall too far.

[gaming tonic]

First off you would have to define what the norm for your FANTASY society is. I say fantasy as such because sometimes we get mired down in historical earth instead of fantasy. If you want adventurers to be outside the normal scope of your society have at it. I do agree that adventurers are most likely different from most people in their mindset. Who runs off to try and kill a dragon? Most just run away. Establish the norm for your fantasy and then you have a consistent baseline to run off of. It could be that armor and weapons are so expensive that only those with an extraordinary background can afford to furnish themselves as adventurers. It is fantasy it is whatever you want it to be. Anything can happen in fantasy. A dragon can fly with the huge body and neck and those little, thin, bendable wings in fantasy.

[Darth Jerod]

I am running my campaign set in the Nentir Vale from 4e, so your typical D&D setting. I try not to think about things like historical settings outside of how I would describe how towns or settings might look for visual cues. I run it more like the realms without getting caught up in all the realms lore, even though I love the realms I do not want that level of detail for this group.

I give the players the impression they are the rock stars to be sure, so calling the adventurers social outcasts is confusing to me. I know his particular background as a Razorclaw Shifter is one of outcast and loner, but he was sure to label the whole group as outcasts and proceeded to point out why to me. He was also pretty clear to me that the party are not heroes, which I have had a few high ranking lords tell them they are heroes for their deeds.

I am just at a loss. Perception is one thing but I talked to a few of the other players and they are just as mystified by his comments. I am going to sit him down on Saturday before the game and ask him what the heck he is talking about.

---------- Post added at 09:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:16 PM ----------

As an example think about how Bilbo Baggins was viewed by most other hobbits after he returned to the shire from his adventure at the Lonely Mountain. He was different. Some even thought of him as a troublemaker. No respectable hobbit would ever go out adventuring and he had done so.

From a societal perspective the adventurers are a different breed. I would not call them outcasts, but the definition does not fall too far.

I totally understand that, and that was also story and background related. What has me baffled if his insistence on the real world and that having trained skills makes you an outcast or even being an adventurer for that matter since most people do not think about going out and seeking fame and fortune.

I kind of beg to differ, I think it comes down to drive. There are dreamers and there are doers. People might dream of doing more but never act upon it, while others dream and then accomplish.

But the setting and the story can also make it possible that making your dream a reality will make you different as in the case of the gentle push out the door Bilbo received.

Again I am going to sit him down and talk to him about his thoughts and set him straight if possible.