Recently, someone in my gaming group made a character that was a Hef.... He argued that hem could use it because it was part Gol, which are partially civilized.
The rest of us argued that the simple fact that he was still a hef made him too savage and wild to be a playable character. It was even more unrealistic that our party consisted of people with spiritual attributes revolving around good. By all means, it was an argument that we could have easily settled ourselves, but he would not give up defending his side.
So, if I could get anybody else's opinion, perhaps we could get him to realize the problem with his character.

This is actually a really excellent topic. Why? Because it has to do with play-goals (evident in SAs) and other issues of so-called "Social Contract."

The question is, "why?" What makes him want to play this character. I don't know enough about your group to evaluate his answers in reply to your gaming style, but I can for mine.

I'm into "blood opera." I like bloody-as-hell games with a little bit of adolescent power fantasy hidden under a lot of deep drama. Said drama almost invariable revolves around issues of loyalty, humanity, and religion. For me, TROS play is about a player's and a character's priorities. If all of us have agreed that we want to focus on being "heroes" and be "good," because that what our SAs point to, then the entire group needs to either adjust or find a way to play off of that so that all have fun.

Frex:
This guy wants to play a Hef because they're big and bad and destroy stuff all the time, and because unlike Gol they're into human chicks. We're looking at a lot of kewl powerz issues here. If that gets in the way of the group's fun, it's bad. Tell him as much.

Or...

This guy thinks that a hef who wants to change or reform, having had a deeply moving experience with a human maiden would be a fun challenge. He wants to be good, too, but his inner nature is getting in the way. The other players are willing to "work" with this, so you move on.

Or...

The other players are fine with it, but acknowledge that it wouldn't work with their characters. Now you run the two sides simultaneously in a connected story, but the Hef isn't in the party (I'm assuming that you play in a "party" or other PC-group format). At some point--perhaps the climax of the story--the Hef and the party must come into contact, resulting in some kind of alliance or in one side killing the other. Is this arrangement not only acceptable to your group, but enthusiastically embraced? If so, this might be a good thing.

What's really important here are the play goals of the group, and how they're willing to comprimise and play off each other. From the sound of it the Hef character isn't gelling here. Find out why this guy wants to be a Hef, and offer other alternatives that work better with others. Gaming is, in the end, a group activity.

Jake

Just make sure that when he does finally "get the girl" you use the new special rules for such in the upcoming suppliment "The flower of sex" (or was that "The sex of steel"?). Oh well, whichever. In either case, you should only let him play a hef that was the result of a hef breeding with a field mouse. He could be called Squeeksquish.

Sorry, in an odd mood today. Being out of work and having writers block will do that.

p.s. Hef are not part Gol unless Daddy Hef got really friendly with Mummy Gol, if you know what I mean. Otherwise, they're both just trollspawn.

Brian.

First, I will answer Jakes reply thing:

I think of all the options you gave, I think the one he fits under would be the one about being really big and strong. You see, this guy has what I call the "smash syndrome" where he likes to make powerful characters (of course, they all die in very bloody ways, within a few weeks after creation) I don't think he had the part about Hef liking human chicks in mind when he made the character, but it wouldn't be below him. I think that some of the other players were fine with it (but only a couple) and the rest really didn't like the idea of being in a party with a Hef. We were actually pretty lucky that one of our guys wasn't there when the Hef played, because one of his SA's was: Faith- All Hef are abominations before the gods.
Yeah, there would have been some big time conflict there.

Now i will comment on what Brian said:

When, and where do I get this "the sex of steel" .. . . jk
As for the papa hef and mama gol, I suppose that is how it happened, but I prefer not to think about it. ewww.....
The most ridiculous part was that he thought he could have race as a priority C, because he was a 'halfling'. Half Hef, half Gol, right? No. It wouldn't work because all hef are, in a way, halflings, but far more powerful than anything you could get with C.....


Okay, im done ranting.

Now now Brian, let's not cross-breed the animals and make this into some deeply complicated thing like DND races can get...

And Jake, a little conflict between players never hurts a story that much.
In the current game I am in, the fugutive/priest I was hired to protect short-changed me on the amount of money I was to be paid, so I thought about doing a double-cross and turning him in to the authorities... (since the reward was 10 times that which he paid me) This however, never materialized once I found out that he was framed, or so I was told..

However, I would not advise(obviously) a PC who would not work well with the party... so maybe this guy can be worked out to where he is a were-hef, if that makes sense... he can turn into a hef with strength depending on the phases of the moon.. or he can be a hef at night regardless of lunar activity..

This resulting compromise I beleive, works best to the GM, the other players, and the guy that wants to play the hef. While he gets to play a hef and have the conflicted view of hef and human, he also gets to cooperate with the PC's in the story in human form, and the GM can work this into his story easier than a full-time hef can be worked in.

So that's your win-win-win situation.. at least in my mind.

-Ingenious

Ingenious wrote: And Jake, a little conflict between players never hurts a story that much.

Let me also comment on this guy. He is all about stats, that's it. No story with any of his characters except for his most recent one which he stole from a tv show. He always dies because he doesn't care about his characters and nobody else does either so he always dies. When We were arguing about his hef character I said that it would be impossible to have any spiritual points at all because he is a hef and not just a hef a hef slash Gol which is makes an unintelligent character. When I told him this he just said 'So!?'. I was outraged by this, how can you make a character with no story or spiritual part of him. What do we do about people like this? Solving this would also solve the hef character problem as well.

I'd let him play the hef...and then kill him off quickly...

Well, toli is wrong in his advice given that it isnt really a solution to the problem at hand.

If you got this guy to play a were-hef where he's human during the day and hef during the night, and his strength increased or decreased with the phases of the moon, he would be happy with his stat-perfecting attempt at a game breaking character. However, making him play his human side actively engages him in the story as well as his participation with the group... and have him be a WEAKLING of a human... maybe. It also frees up the possiblity of him having SA's that can gel with the story, given that your job as GM is to guide him into that. If he is still completely unwilling to be part of the story or to help the group or socialize with them and he's just a problem... then I have no clue for the solution to that problem, and most likely Jake can.

Try pitching that idea to him, and see what he says.
If he just wants to be an attempted game-breaker and not want to participate with the storyline or the group.. then PUT YOUR DAMNED FOOT DOWN AND SAY NO! ....(you also have a duty to the other people in this)
Sometimes players need a reality check my their wiser, more seasoned friends that KNOW the impact their character is going to have, and for him to go without a care in the world if his character dies.. what fun is that for him? Ask him that. If he just says that 'a strong character makes an impressive character that really can do alot of damage' then that is silly. At that point I might be a bit off-kilter enough to show him how truly vulnerable his characters are with the TROS system by showing him that even his STRONGEST of characters will fall with a single shot from an archer, or a single blow to the head... etc.

Just some thoughts. (sorry for being a bit angry, I just took my section tests in college right now)

-Ingenious

Ingenious wrote: Well, toli is wrong in his advice given that it isnt really a solution to the problem at hand.

Wow, thanks for all the feed back.

Toli: Well, when we let him use the Hef character, he did end up dying . .. . but it was a fair death. both combatants chose attack, and in the reflex roll, both hits landed at the same time. Both died. it was pretty bloody.....

Jake: The problem is, we already have enough conflict in our party. There is an elf in our party that is constantly having conflict with my Dwarf character. For a while the conflicts were lessening, but then a bunch of wierd stuff happened and the conflicts were back up again. I'd explain it all, but it would take a while, so I'll save it for later. I'm just glad he got over the phase were he would try to cut off my beard in my sleep..... but I do agree, some conflict is very good.

Ben: if only it weren't illegal . . . .

Rico: I agree with everything you say. .. . btw, are we playing your next scenario tomorrow?

Ingenious: I think that your idea of having him be a were-hef could be an interesting idea. It might be hard to work out, because we may rarely be playing on the right phases of the moon (well I guess moon would be plural in weyrth, so the full moon could be out quite frequently)
As for what you said about the strongest of characters dying in a single blow, that is just how it happened. A very greusome single blow. Overall, it was a very violent scenario. The whole campaign itself was probably the most brutal one we've ever played.....

Well, thankyou, everyone, for your opinions.

Wow, thanks for all the feed back.

Toli: Well, when we let him use the Hef character, he did end up dying . .. . but it was a fair death. both combatants chose attack, and in the reflex roll, both hits landed at the same time. Both died. it was pretty bloody.....

Jake: The problem is, we already have enough conflict in our party. There is an elf in our party that is constantly having conflict with my Dwarf character. For a while the conflicts were lessening, but then a bunch of wierd stuff happened and the conflicts were back up again. I'd explain it all, but it would take a while, so I'll save it for later. I'm just glad he got over the phase were he would try to cut off my beard in my sleep..... but I do agree, some conflict is very good.

Ben: if only it weren't illegal . . . .

Rico: I agree with everything you say. .. . btw, are we playing your next scenario tomorrow?

Ingenious: I think that your idea of having him be a were-hef could be an interesting idea. It might be hard to work out, because we may rarely be playing on the right phases of the moon (well I guess moon would be plural in weyrth, so the full moon could be out quite frequently)
As for what you said about the strongest of characters dying in a single blow, that is just how it happened. A very greusome single blow. Overall, it was a very violent scenario. The whole campaign itself was probably the most brutal one we've ever played.....

Well, thankyou, everyone, for your opinions.

umm, I don't know how my reply was posted twice..... odd.

Well, it's easy if he can be a hef at night when the sun sets too you know, on a nightly basis rather. (In case he wants to create yet another hef character)((or for that matter anyone else does)). And for that to be the case, say that is the side effect of the hef's pursuit of beautiful human maidens... and the resultant half-breed.... *shudders at mental imagery*
and the mixing of human and magical genes? *shrug*

Just some further thoughts.
-Ingenious

well, ingenious, I think the idea of beign a hef by night could work out. THe only problem is: that is very similar to the way a character I am introducing to my group in a week or so is. of course, he isn't a hef by night, but i wont get into that. if you'll look at my character idea post, you'll see what I am talking about.

I got the idea from the old school movies/series like the Wolfman, and teen-wolf.. etc etc etc. However, these two situations are different in that.. your character's split persona is via a curse... his is genetic and can't ever be made fully into one or the other like you can once you break your curse.

And now we've merged two topics into one, what would Brian's sticky advise about that eh? lol

-Ingenious

Guys...

I gotta say, there's a lot of dancing around in this thread, and much avoidance of the real issue which is, as Jake said in his first post, social contract.

(Now, I don't own a copy of the TROS main book yet. It may be that when Jake wrote the game, he intended that no player ever absolutely hands down should ever be a Hef. But... I've known Jake for a while now, and I seriously doubt this. :)

With that disclaimer out of the way, I have this to say:

This is vitally important. Krammer, you and your group are going to have to lose the idea that it is somehow wrong for this player (I don't know his real name, so let's call him Hugh) to play a Hef. In fact, it's apparent that it's not really about playing the Hef at all... it's about conflicting approaches. Your posts, and Rico's post are full of all kinds of key phrases and loaded statements: Hugh has a "problem" that you need to "fix." He's all about stats. His character has no story. We want him to realize the problem with his character. That's below even him.

This is bad bad BAD! This game is Hugh's game, just as much as it is your game. It's function is to provide him with enjoyable entertainment. You're making value judgements about what Hugh enjoys.

See, this is the really important part. There's nothing in your posts that gives any reason why Hugh shouldn't play a Hef beyond the simple fact that you don't like it. Nowhere do you explain how having a Hef in the game will decrease the entertainment value for you personally, or for your friends. You don't explain how his play style is actually conflicting with what you do - how his play style is stopping you from doing things you want. All you've explained is how Hugh's playing style is wrong, so you're going to go all out to stop him from playing a Hef.

Now, no offense to Brian & co., but clever GM tricks are not going to solve this problem, only sweep it under the rug a little longer. You guys are either going to have to change your thinking, or stop playing with Hugh. You can't "fix" Hugh. Because he's not doing anything wrong.

I can tell you, that if this was one of the games I run with my group, this would be a non-issue. The player wants to play a Hef? Awesome. Now we've got a PC Hef in the game. Wow, that's great. Now I've got all sorts of opportunities to create new conflicts and hook the party in. Anything that gives the GM more setup for conflicts is a boone! But wait... all he wants to do is have big fights and break stuff? No big deal. TROS is good at that. The combat character will provide some nice contrast from the rest of the angsty SA-ridden PCs. His characters have an operating life of just a few weeks, because he's not into spiritual attributes? As long as Hugh himself is cool with this, then where's the problem? Character turnover gives some nice variety.

My response to all these complaints lands squarely on the side of good o'l Hugh: So freakin' what? It's not your business how Hugh enjoys himself, unless what he's doing actually prevents you from enjoying yourself. If that's the case, then show us a real conflict, instead of complaining about Hugh playing the "wrong" way. The posts in this thread sound like a bunch of snotty elitist White Wolf players trying to bring one of the low-brow masses to enlighteninment. Give me a break.

Ingenious wrote: Well, toli is wrong in his advice given that it isnt really a solution to the problem at hand.-Ingenious

Paganini wrote: Now, no offense to Brian & co., but clever GM tricks are not going to solve this problem, only sweep it under the rug a little longer.

Nathan, it's not a social contract issue, it's a GNS one. Plainly. We've a Gamist player exploiting what he sees as a potential loophole. Now the other players either have to play Gamist too, and come up with characters to match, or they have to try and play Sim/Nar while the other player plays, essentially, a completely different game.

This is so classic that it's screaming.

And the solution, IMO, is to kill the character.

That's said that way for impact. What I mean is that TROS has a clear Creative Agenda. The way to "fix" the player is to expose him to how the rules work. Have his Hef get in the way of another PC who's firing on lots of SAs, and watch the lowly human carve him up. Once he sees that, he'll get what the game is all about. Then he'll either change (most likely) to play like the others, or he'll decide he doesn't want to play. Problem solved.

Now, there may be ways to accomplish this besides killing the character off. The only important part is that the system be allowed to be displayed so that the player gets the idea. But as Jake points out, killihng them is the quickest way to recognition of the fact.

So we're not talking about being punitive (that would be a horrible thing). We're talking about letting the system do it's thing.

Mike

I looked at these ahem, 'problems' as, A. the hef character not wanting to participate in the majority of the storyline, and B. as a possible game-breaking character...

Now then, to totally plagarize and steal advice from some other RPG system to be name-less...
Game breaking characters: or rather, super-characters.
'Many players see their characters as nothing more than a collection of numbers that affects game systems. They don't think of their characters as personalities to be developed. Players like this want to "win" the game, somehow. These players are missing out on a lot of fun.'
'Cooperation is a key element of role-playing. In any group of PC's, everyone has strengths and weaknesses to overcome. This is the basis for the adventuring party--even a small group with sufficiently diverse talents can accomplish deeds far greater than its size would indicate'
'Now, throw in a character who is an army by himself. He doesn't need the other characters, except perhaps as cannon fodder or bearers. He doesn't need allies. His presence alone destroys one of the most fundamental aspects of the game, cooperation.'
Cheesy, but it gets the point across... I hope.
I beleive this is what Jake meant by the social contract bit, that there should be some cooperation, possibly with a little conflict. And like arrogance, a little bit of conflict goes a long way.
If this 'Hugh' is nothing more than a statistic producing machine, limit him in this. Weaken his character. As was stated previously... his character did not last long... and he did not seem to care. As a GM in that situation, I would most likely be stunned... because is not the point of role-playing to develop your character over a longer period of game time than say.... a few weeks? Surely the Hef character survived to an age of, how-ever long, and then as soon as he starts adventuring.... he dies two weeks later? Surely the Hef would not be so wreckless in his last weeks to live any more so than his previous span of existance.

I still would like to see this resolved to a point that 'Hugh' can have his self perceived 'super' character, and still being a part of the group.
At least in my experience with D&D, I hated dying... it meant I had to come up with a whole new character, new background, different style.. etc and the DM also had to fit the new character into the story. And having to do that EVERY session would be a pain in the ASS. My group usually plays once a month and those sessions are very very long. To take time away from the story so that a careless player can get a new character in that session would seriously irritate the other players eventually. I'm sure after a few instances I myself would be tired of it, as a player or not.

Now, if this helps... good, if it doesn't oh well.
-Ingenious
::edited to note that Mr Holmes is more on the ball than I am.