/fur/ - Furry★

>>83150

Did people forget how roleplaying works in a tabletop roleplaying game? That's the real question.

Being a gigantic fuckwad by doing nothing but yiffing everything you come across is irritating and gets nothing done, while being a gigantic fuckwad by being an autistic edgelord who does nothing but min/max numbers to roll the tits off the DMs shit or module is boring as all hell.

It can fall back to the DM and the group dynamics, ie a group of friends who already understand how each other works generally, or just the DM whos job becomes trying to get the group to actually roleplay and make the whole experience fun and interesting in this regard, rather than having the option to just flavor the whole experience.

Don't get me wrong, in the last regard, pushing and pulling players can get pretty fun, but that also depends on that player in question. If they're intent on being a sack of shit, they're going to be a sack of shit, and they'll be as shitty as they can to ruin the whole damn thing.

>>83155

>Did people forget how roleplaying works in a tabletop roleplaying game?

Only really a problem with the current state of the furry community. Furries used to design characters, which works perfectly fine with the RPG model. But now they only have a fursona, which can usually be defined as: "myself, but taller and stronger and sexier, and with a much bigger penis". So it's par for the course for them to want to self-insert into any "role-playing" experience. Modern RPG games that allow you to create your own character with enough flexibility to make him look exactly like you, very granular stats to make him think just like you, and a variety of playstyles to make him act just like you (I'm a smart sneaky sniper in every fucking game) has contributed to this. Nobody wants to play characters; they want to play an embellished and idealized form of themselves. These games encourage that. Gone are the days when you played as Mario or Link because that's all the choice you got, even if Mario and Link are nothing like you. Now you get to play YOURSELF as a badass, but in Skyrim or Fallout or GTA or whatever else.

>>83143 (OP)

>do you insert furry characters in

No. But, I do play non-human races as much as I can, because humans are dull, and I like trying to properly represent a different creature. These aren't necessarily animal people though.

Inserting furshit is generally cancer, because furshit is largely indistinguishable from humans.

If you do it right, though, it should be fine. Make a kobold, rather than Kate the Lizard.

>>83402

In my experience, getting together people over the internet for a tabletop session is like herding cats. Except the cats all live in different time zones, have differing work schedules, differing social obligations, and often don't all have the same grasp over the English language.

>That map

I would like it a lot more if the walls and city layout weren't so nonsensical, and if the river didn't just... end at a wall.

I always figured the best way to play an animal character in a tabletop game would be to give them pros and cons and unique abilities that fit the species

like if you were a fox you could have extra stealth, or a cheetah with extra speed but low strength, or a mouse could fit into small holes and chew ropes and stuff

I think there was a wiki somewhere that had suggestions for that kinda stuff in Pathfinder, but I can't find it now

of course I haven't actually played D&D (but I've read a lot about it), so I don't know if these are the right terms or how they'd work

>>83602

>the river actually flowed into a tunnel of sorts under the city

I doubt medieval engineers had the technological capacity to create something like that for a river of that size. Would make more sense to just redirect it directly to the sea/lake to the right of the wall or simply not build over it but let it flow through the city proper. Having a direct source of fresh water in a walled city is of paramount importance in case of sieges, after all.

>>83614

This is a good realistic village design. Has a place or worship and a place to get drunk, which are the staples of society. One that small would not USUALLY have a blacksmith, but then it's a mining camp so good tools would be in high demand; although, since they don't also have a large smeltery it seems likely that his primary job is sharpening used tools, not making new ones. Maybe those mines don't produce iron ore?

>>83143 (OP)

I play as sergals whenever I can.

>>83143 (OP)

>Do you insert furry characters in?

I wouldn't say I'd insert it given the opportunity, but I will play a beast race given the opportunity. The last character I made was a kobold. I asked the DM that instead of a strength penalty I could get it in intelligence and the dexterity bonus into charisma.

For his backstory he was found as a hatchling and adopted into a dwarven squad because he somehow was impossibly adorable (Highest stat was in charisma, I think it was 18 base) but an accidental mace to the head made him completely retarded and forever have the mind of a child (Like 2-3 intelligence he ended up having.) so they ended up training him as a warrior (Or was it a battle rager?) and then sent him out to do the dwarven adventuring tour.

He'd do some really stupid things like he convinced the party's barbarian to throw him at a shop that was closed because he wanted candy. However, since he was chaotic good he didn't want to break any windows so he was being thrown at the stone wall over and over until it woke up the shop keeper. That was just during the start of the campaign.

>>83150

I agree, you can't use the anthro characters as a proxy for self insert, and when they do, holy shit it's cringy as fuck.

Also, does anyone have the North stories?

>>83808

What's the point of being a kobold that's not like a kobold?? I mean, if you wanted to play what is essentially a pygmy orc, why not do that?

>>83814

most people don't want to play as an unintelligent dim witted lizard person who's race just acts as cannon fodder. They'd rather just play "myself, except lizard"

It's also an example of people only wanting to play the exception and not the rule. You can see it with furries where they'll want to play a member of their race who doesn't act at all like their race and acts smug and superior. It's very self insert.

>>83821

>most people don't want to play as an unintelligent dim witted lizard person who's race just acts as cannon fodder

Goblins seem pretty popular.

>>83814

>Why play a drow whose on the surface when you can just play an elf?

>Why play a human barbarian when you can just play an orc?

>Why play a wizard when you can play a sorcerer?

Why even be creative in character creation when you can just optimize a character's statistics and class and remove the roleplay aspect out altogether?

Everyone at the table will love you when all you ever do is mutter to yourself, then declare an move, roll, then say "Success." or "Fail." depending on the outcome of said roll and then fall into silence with a glassy eyed stare as you let the GM fumble making an explanation to the others of what exactly you did.

A character can be different or interesting. And the golden rule of the rule books is that they are a guideline and not entirely set in stone. That's not saying everyone just does what they want, but to make things more interesting for yourself and the players around you.

For example, any fighter doesn't have to be super optimized for strength and constitution to get the most out of them, a lot of the fighter classes can bank heavily with charisma for example, like in the middle of combat they can shout in someone's face, do a charisma check, and startle the fuck out of their opponent and create a weakness.

Likewise with player characters you can discuss with your GM on making a character more interesting like adding handicaps to gain a bonus in a different area, shifting statistics a bit because not every human was brought up the same way. Say I have a human who lived on a farm all his life and just wanted to take up adventuring.They certainly wouldn't be the smartest and could take a penalty to intelligence because he doesn't even know how to read, but that penalty can be put into wisdom and strength.

Not to mention, within the campaign I used this kobold in, orcs were more to dwarves KOS while kobolds were treated more as vermin, and this one was a major pest.

>>83821

Can't help but agree there.

>>83823

Goblins have enough quirks with them to be interesting when played right.

I remember having a goblin magician who didn't know any magic at all but just used a bunch of props and cheap parlor tricks, but would play himself up as a great and powerful wizard at any opportunity.

>>83825

The point of roleplay is to play something established, not take something established and twist and mutilate it into something that's completely unrecognizable just because you want to be a special snowflake. You can't take a fox and declare it's a fucking cactus because it was raised by cacti, lives in a desert, and stands still a lot. There's a difference between altering a character slightly and making it completely different. He doesn't LOOK like a kobold, doesn't think like a kobold, doesn't act like a kobold, doesn't have strength/weaknesses like a kobold... WHAT PART of it was still a kobold aside from the label??

>>83821

>>83814

To be fair, less I looked at it, the rules for the kobolds is quite terrible.

A rather large penalty, combined with disadvantage in daylight, although with some decent abilities, though grovel seems to be rather abhorrent to my own personal

I would personally try to fluff them more around the standard race attributes, rather than the frankly incredibly limited lot they give you now. get rid of the disadvantage in daylight, as well as the pack tactics and on since, and probably grovel as well, and remove the minuses, and it probably be decent to play. Maybe give them a trapmaker's racial ability ala lizards and their bone crafting.

>>83845

>get rid of the disadvantage in daylight

What system are you guys talking about anyway?

Didn't some of them have some kinda eyewear specifically made to let kobolds get around that?

>>83842

>Where did I say the looks changed?

You said he was "impossibly adorable" so as to get the charisma bonus.

>All these characters are slightly different from the baseline so that justifies me making something that's a kobold in name only

There is a such thing as a matter of degree. You wanted to be "a kobold" for autism reasons, but didn't want to like one at all. So you made up this cockamamie backstory and all these alternate penalties and bonuses. Just because your DM allowed it doesn't make it absurd; and all your desperate defensive ad hominem attacks on how I do or do not play don't change that. You still haven't satisfactorily explained WHY a kobold; excuse me if all evidence points to you wanting to be the special snowflake of the party by changing as much as possible.

>>83845

It's completely obvious that kobolds were never intended to be PCs. They just kinda threw some shit together like "Well, if you REALLY WANT TO, you can do it, but we're not going to make it fun for you." For the most part, you either have to get special rulesets so they can actually be useful in a game (like a party of all kobolds, with weaker enemies and stuff), or your DM has to bend over backwards to accommodate it like the guy up there with a dwarf wearing a kobold mask.

Don't get me wrong. I LIKE kobolds, as a concept, and would love to play as one. But they're just so limited and weak as-is. Imagine a DnD campaign set in the Zootopia universe, and everyone is a bull or a wolf or a bear, and you're a mouse. Yeah, actually mouse-sized and all that. Do you really think you're going to be able to "measure up" on an adventure without some handwave superpowers that make you decidedly NOT mouse-like (kinda like the superpowers they gave Judy so she could fight a rhino, except ever so much more so)? Oh sure, you can do some things, like sneak through small spaces and maybe pick locks from the inside, but in a system that revolves around combat, you're decidedly NOT a combat-type. It just doesn't fit on your typical campaign.

>>83910

>He thinks I altered the appearance to get a charisma bonus

Your words:

>he somehow was impossibly adorable

An "adorable" kobold is like an adorable goblin. Just doesn't make any sense. What, did you also make it a "cutebold"??

Continuing to strawman me as someone who doesn't tolerate anything "slightly" out of the norm STILL DOES NOT JUSTIFY you making a character that is EXTREMELY out of the norm. You can keep on screaming insults (all of which are wrong, by the way), but it just makes you look more and more defensive of your poor choices. I guess you're not used to getting called out on your bullshit so you become screeching mad when it happens. Grow up.

>>83913

Alright, how 18 charisma will work with 3 intelligence. Cutebolds aren't even kobolds

And no, don't pull another retarded "pygmy orc"

My wife and I got a DnD starter kit with a gift card to play together.(We don't have friends to speak of)

Because we don't know what we're doing, we started by doing some combat to practice the basic game mechanics. Her level 1 rogue halfling narrowly evades death by three wolves, then loses her bow fighting three skeletons.

Deciding we had the mechanics down, we moved onto a custom campaign of extremely small scope, introduce my own character, a level 1 catfolk wizard. He has -1 charisma, so (with some inspiration from life) I made him into an autist incapable of exercising discretion.

A beggar child approaches the two in a run-down neighborhood, quite obviously at risk of being an informant for some local thieves.

The halfling digs around in her purse and fetches a single copper piece. "All I have is this." My character looks into his own coin purse "Can you break a platinum? I don't have anything smaller."

After escaping a dragon's horde by agreeing to leave our current money and bring back more more later, we ran across a small band of thieves that wanted us dead. We ran back to the horde and begged the the dragon to save us. For fun I actually played out the combat of the young green dragon fighting 8 commoners. They fired a salvo of arrows and the dragon returned fire with his breath, overkilling half of them and sending the rest running. The halfling picked off the fleeing stragglers. Looting the bodies, we handed the dragon our earnings. It grinned at the return on its small investment of mercy. Sliding a small pile of its coins to us, it gleefully sent our characters on their way to bring back more coin-having goons to keep the revenue flowing.

And that's where we are now, employees of some giant monster, leading countless useful idiots to their deaths for a tiny sliver of their gold.

>>83939

Oh, I dunno, you could have maybe just accepted that you wouldn't get a charisma bonus because that doesn't make any fucking sense with a kobold? Kind of the whole point of this. You wanted to be something that was impossible with the options you had, so you decided to just make shit up. I bet you're the sort who goes to a restaurant and demands the cooks make you something that isn't on the menu.

>>83956

>Tricking people into getting killed by a dragon so they can share in a small part of the profit

Now see, THIS is the kind of thing I would expect kobolds to do.

>>83980

Ability scores are up to the individual, mate. You get them, you can put them in whatever you like, as your character goes.

If you're playing something that requires charisma, you'd be a massive retard who's going to have a gimped character that only serves to drag the party down, if you decide "WELL A HALFORC WOULDN'T HAVE CHARISMA".

Have you ever even played DnD?

>>83981

>You get them, you can put them in whatever you like, as your character goes.

laughs in 2nd Ed.

>If you're playing something that requires charisma, you'd be a massive retard who's going to have a gimped character that only serves to drag the party down, if you decide "WELL A HALFORC WOULDN'T HAVE CHARISMA".

You need a new DM if they're consistently pitting you against things you need to be min/maxed to handle.

Or you need to stop min/maxing so that they don't have to do that to actually threaten your group, one or the other.

You're making a character, not a combat unit.

Sometimes people want to do things they aren't perfectly suited for, it's how we are.

Let the gnome be a barbarian, fuck it.

If he has a reason to want to swing an oversized weapon around and get 300% mad, then he's gonna do it regardless of his reduced weapon damage from size and lower strength score.

Hell, he might even find situations that his size is a boon and you'll get a neat story out of it.

>>83988

While I agree on the whole, you still have to make something functional.

A paladin has to have points in charisma, if you want your spells to do shit. A rouge needs dex. A warrior can choose between dex and strength, but it needs one.

Not having anything in your primary attribute because "MUH CHARACTER" just gives you a gimped peasant.

If everyone else in your party is also a gimped peasant, your GM can balance it appropriately. But, if everyone else in your party is a sensible human being, then that won't be the case.

A gnome barb is totally viable, and I say you should do it: Just remember to allocate your stats sensibly. You don't get racial boosts to your strength, sure, and your size'll fuck you on occasion, but, it can easily be functional while still leaving the character intact.

>>83989

>Just remember to allocate your stats sensibly.

Of course, I was mostly talking about the race selection.

That gnome barb would likely have more strength than the average gnome after lugging around heavy armor and weapons all the time anyway.

Would just make sense to put a higher rolled stat into strength, and the racial penalty will probably knock it down to something low compared to a min/maxed character, but perfectly usable unless your DM hates you.

>>83990

That's pretty much my argument, I guess. It's a bit of a shame newer lots don't have penalties, though. But, then, 5e kobolds are absolute trash, as mentioned earlier.

>>83981

>Ability scores are up to the individual, mate. You get them, you can put them in whatever you like, as your character goes

Then why choose a race? Why choose a class? Why not just fill out your stats willy-nilly without any sort of restraint or reasoning because you want to be something, and goddammit nobody is going to stop you!

You still haven't told me why you wanted to be a kobold that is nothing like a kobold. Was the cloaca REALLY that important to your character-building process?

>>84000

To create a character within the rules of the game. I mean, if you just want to go full character, you can always play a freeform RPG. And, sure, there's worth in that. But, I like rule-based systems, since they give some actual accomplishment and struggle to actions, beyond mere story.

I'm not that guy.

>kobold that acts nothing like a kobold that has 3 int and 18 cha

>literally "shit where you stand" levels of intelligence, can barely string 2 words together and has little to no sense of object permanence

>"BUT HES SOOOOOO KOOT"

Yall niggas arguing with a babyfur trying to justify his magical realm. Or possibly someone who doesn't understand that 3 int is barely above the most basic and animalistic of thoughts. But considering there's a thread on this board where people are trying to justify fucking a dead dog, I'm leaning towards the former.

>>83990

>barbarian

>heavy armor

You don't know this game very well, do you?

>>85434

If you have a group that's willing to tolerate outright furshit, literally anything with some homebrew.

>>85623

I just created a ghostwise halfling druid, and i am loving it!! My character just 11th level and got sunbeam for his 6th level spell. It is so much fun turning yourself into a mini orbital cannon for a minute! :D

>>85616

>int is basically useless

<int is base power for wizard, excellent secondary class for assassins and easier to benefit from thanks to getting higher level spells at lower levels then a sorcerer, also boost all your skills and extra skillpoints gained, making it fundamental for sneaking, lockpicking and bluffing sapient individuals during combat among other things, also some conversation require high enough intelligence to understand what another is talking about or to get extra dialogue lines

If you play as a barbarian or all might and no brain warrior perhaps, otherwise no, and with the exclusion of the classes you mentioned, unless this particular character play alone or is the party representative speaker, charisma is useless

>>92436

Personal interaction stats are misleading because the DMs social interaction skills make or break NPC encounters.

>>85616

>charisma for spellcasting

This is why I stick to Fallout universe.

Is there the equivalent of F.A.T.A.L for furs?

>>92447

>>92445

Highly recommend Yowesephth's Filth Folio <3

>>83143 (OP)

I play Magic the Gathering, does that count?

>>92466

Tragic the Garnering was better.

>>92463

got an upload or link?

>>92468

You can probably find it on Google drive somewhere

>>92461

>in DnD, obviously you don't get skill points

Maybe in 5e, but you do in 3.5e and in Pathfinder, if you count it as D&D3.75. In those editions it's CHA that is the dump stat