On age and ability.
Reminded last night of a certain trend, I feel it necessary to let something out. I may have voiced such thoughts before, but when one's character is several centuries old, has been active in all that time and is supposed to have all sorts of experiences to draw upon, one should act the part. The average immortal(for lack of a better word) that I'd encountered in my given circles has almost always acted one of two ways: a perpetual teenager with massive entitlement issues or an emotionless wreck of horrendous decisions despite claiming to be smarter than anyone who calls them out on it.
I have no problem with one of either of these characters being in a scene or story, but we're talking a half-dozen of each. To read profiles or hear the players describe them, they're a rather varied lot; this does not carry over to practice, however. Ancient warriors are never methodical, aged tacticians are charging infantry into every battle, studied mages can't get past throwing fireballs...
...And then the players get huffy when my soldier, just under thirty, does something they didn't expect. You can't tell me in a millennium of battle and study you've never encountered a feint, diversion tactic or antimagic countermeasure. If they haven't, that suggests to me they've been a lot more idle than you say. I could handle this just fine if your anger was purely in-character, but falling back and telling me that I SHOULDN'T gain ground just because they're OH SO MUCH OLDER... I'll have to take the stance of a public defender in another of my games, because all I have to say to that is "shut up."
If your character is well-versed in their field, it stands to say you should demonstrate it, not just shove their history in my face as proof that I shouldn't win. Fact is one got through their defenses, either come up with a backup plan or move on. I have no reason to pander to your delusions of grandeur if you can't be bothered to show the slightest bit of foresight in a character that should really know better.
I have no problem with one of either of these characters being in a scene or story, but we're talking a half-dozen of each. To read profiles or hear the players describe them, they're a rather varied lot; this does not carry over to practice, however. Ancient warriors are never methodical, aged tacticians are charging infantry into every battle, studied mages can't get past throwing fireballs...
...And then the players get huffy when my soldier, just under thirty, does something they didn't expect. You can't tell me in a millennium of battle and study you've never encountered a feint, diversion tactic or antimagic countermeasure. If they haven't, that suggests to me they've been a lot more idle than you say. I could handle this just fine if your anger was purely in-character, but falling back and telling me that I SHOULDN'T gain ground just because they're OH SO MUCH OLDER... I'll have to take the stance of a public defender in another of my games, because all I have to say to that is "shut up."
If your character is well-versed in their field, it stands to say you should demonstrate it, not just shove their history in my face as proof that I shouldn't win. Fact is one got through their defenses, either come up with a backup plan or move on. I have no reason to pander to your delusions of grandeur if you can't be bothered to show the slightest bit of foresight in a character that should really know better.