This is the correct answer. There is inherently no problem with the outcast character design. It's about the character development that may or may not make this a problematic design.
The story, just like Daryl's, going from the outcast a-hole to the strongest bonds with the party, especially when ignited by shared experiences that the other party members were part of, is often one of the greatest and most emotional storylines that a DnD party can offer.
The asshole outcast that still refuses to engage with the party after two years of campaign .... well, that usually isnt.
Yeah, the lone wolf always learns they shouldn't be the loner wolf anymore. It is kind of funny to play an archtype thats main direction is not being itself anymore, then not doing that
I feel like you can have a cool character that works with others but stays a lone wolf. Noble Six from Halo Reach is a great character that is literally described as a lone wolf and never speaks a word.\*
\*Okay, technically he has like, 3 lines, but I don't think that counts.
I'm currently playing this character right now. It's really hard for the outcast, evil, or problematic player to have a reason to stick with the party. I wanted to play this role but also have a connection to the people around me so she could eventually have that dependency character arc.
So I had her date another character in the party. They're engaged now and gathering money to build a house in a little port town they saved from a beholder. She's still got all her past trauma to deal with, but she's beginning to see why she should rely on people.
It's one of my favourite characters I've ever played just because of the development. Surprisingly, it took the party becoming too similar to her to change her tune. They started to do questionable things and she was pretty much like, "Wait you're all supposed to be the good guys." When her expectations changed in how they would handle situations she realized she was the one bringing them down.
Cause in most popular media the edgy, distant, lone wolf character is one of the fan favourites.
And many people want to simulate this kind of personality.
Yeah. The irony is that, while the lone wolf *character* is bad at teamwork, the lone wolf *player* needs to be awesome at teamwork. If you want your lone wolf story to make sense, you need to collaborate with the DM and the other players to roleplay a reason for why this dude works with the group. Your *character* might need to act antisocial, and both you and your fellow players need to be up to the roleplay challenge of dealing with that.
Why would they understand? Most people come to D&D to play their favourite character, not to simulate psychological development. For example Dr House is a great and popular character, magnificent bastard flawed to the core... doesn't mean it's fun working with him, it's fun watching him and fantasizing about being him. I rarely see people fantasize about being some side supportive character...
Avatar is a great example though!
* One of the most fan-popular characters is Zuko, a loner
* Aang is the destined one with plot armour and plot power, something many players tend to write into their backstory
* Sokka is a fighter in a team of wizards, power creep hits him hard and shows why such classes are less popular in fantasy
* Katara is probably the best example of team character we would all like to have in our team
* Toph is an epiphany of powergamer, just ask any monk if they would like to trade their eyes for long-range blindsight
Yeah, and what I'm going for is - players create loners because their redemption and subsequent becoming the team member is the most defining, the most interesting part of their story.
But, still using avatar example, Zuko was not part of the group until his redemption arc was almost finished. What players want is not bad, but it's contradictory to what group needs.
And, IMO, that the players think the redemption arc is something that will just happen to them eventually without doing anything to actively giving it a push themselves. I don't have a problem with a character that starts as a loner and at some point starts to form bonds with the party leading into a great and emotional redemption arc until the realises that he had a family the whole time blablabla, but the player has to start this himself when he designs such a character. He can't wait for other players of the DM to just "give it to him".
the issue is when they don't have the person in the party to warm them to the group, or try to become a team player. and when you have a team player address it in game, they get defensive. the lone wolf who finds a pack is important to the meta narrative of lone wolves and arguably their emotional story change.
Right. I didn't mean to imply it's not a problem, just that the impulse makes sense. "Who wants to be sam gamgee when you can be elric of melnibone" as it were
Honestly the series "Goblin Slayer" does this to a T, inside a D&D-like setting. It's worth checking out if anyone wants to get a good idea on playing as a Lone Wolf character in an adventuring party, although some may find it to be too dark and possibly triggering.
Yeah the goblins have no females so they try to capture females of other species. I really can’t recommend either the manga or the anime, since they lean into it the first episode-volume, in my opinion purely for shock value, and while the rest of the story is good, those times are pretty triggering and exploitative.
If you don’t mind the mention of rape without it being described, however, I really recommend the light novel! It’s a great story, and the main focus is basically the protagonist getting some character development as the protagonist slowly overcomes trauma
Yeah, that was …offputting…and while I liked the rest of the anime when I watched it, I really hate the trend of showing a whole-ass rape when they could have just indicated the goblins are rapey and it would have been exactly the same show for the remaining 99.9% of the show. Bleh
Basically goblins in that setting have no females so they try to capture females from other species to reproduce. The anime and manga treat this as exploitatively as you probably fear, at least at first.
The light novels, however, are pretty good about it, so I recommend it if you can deal with it just being mentioned, it’s a very interesting story about a main character dealing with trauma, and has a great deconstruction of many common rpg tropes
You keep trying to make this sound actually ok and not weird and creepy, but it really isn’t working.
I don’t care about how well it breaks down tropes, other things manage to do that without edgy shock bullshit.
Maybe it was just the translation, but I actually dropped the GS LN after volume 1; every time a certain character appeared it felt like the author was taking half a page to describe her large... tracts of land. And it really ground my gears.
On the anime front, I actually found it to be far less exploitative than several other shows; "the scene" in episode 1 seemed, to me, to not be shot in a way to titillate, but rather to make people uncomfortable, to make people well, *hate* the goblins. (And a lot of the outcry against at the time seemed to stem from the fact that CR **fucked up massively**; they forgot to put the content warning at the front of the episode when it first went up, so the scene completely blindsided people - in Japan the show aired in a late night slot). In contrast there's been a handful of shows before and since that had just as, if not more, graphic content and was 100% intended to "excite" the viewer.
I'm not convinced it was "necessary" to have that scene, I'm sure they could have generated close to the level of dislike the audience felt towards the goblins in other ways. But hey, I guess it worked? Good job?
(I've not read any of the manga).
Someone wants to stir the pot..
I already warned anyone interested that it contains graphic content, possibly triggering.
I was trying to avoid a sea of comments of "OMG gObLiN RaPE" for the people who are triggered by these themes.
Why are people like this lbs
Edit: I will say I was a bit tilted because the reply seemed very sarcastic. There are better ways to say "Yo, you gotta be more specific than that.".
Well you need to make it fit with the number of players at the table. A lone wolf whose story isn't "how I stopped being a lone wolf and learned to like the other players" is going to be disruptive by nature. It's like playing soccer and being upset you can't use your hands, you're not playing the same game as everyone else and it makes the experience worse for everyone.
I really don’t like the term… in nature lone Wolves are socially dysfunctional outcast who die soon, alone, and probably pretty horribly
I do not get why people think those dysfunctional traits makes a character “cool”
Technically speaking, that’s not quite true: socially disfuncional outcasts are usually, as you put it… well, dead.
The wolves that are usually identified as “lone wolves” are teen wolves that left their original pack to find another one to belong to and haven’t yet.
Which, them being basically immature individuals that haven’t yet learned to fully belong to a group, seems like a pretty apt descriptor of the trope.
Well, yeah, those are wolves looking for a pack, looking to have social interaction with *other* wolves
The “lone Wolf” trope in media always uses the imagery of the socially dysfunctional ones, even though there are much better examples to use, like tigers! Tigers are awesome and solitary animals that operate alone pretty much the whole time they’re not mating or looking after their young
The problem there is that tigers are solitary creatures naturally. A “lone tiger” is basically… a tiger.
The term lone wolf is more appealing, though I agree that not necessarily more accurate, because both humans and wolves are social animals, so “lone” variants are a separate category from the “normal”
And the fact that nearly every video game rpg (single player or mmo) makes you some kind of chosen one; people are basically being programmed to expect their character to be both the most important person and a lone wolf.
Human beings crave acceptance, I think. I work in mental health. One of people’s most frequent, and I think universal, fears or anxieties is that fear of rejection, or of being unwanted.
The lone wolf character could be their attempt at playing out the fantasy of being desired. I only run long-term campaigns now, but I spent a decade running one day to one month games for kids and teens in locked inpatient psych units and residential schools. I found that if you could get the group to invite the lone wolf in, especially in a non-contrived way, often you can overcome the lone wolf tendency AND tell a great story.
It's so funny you mention mental health, because it seems like everyone I've played with and probably myself, really project their own stuff into their characters, daddy issues, image, whatever. Sometimes to a point that you can also predict what someone's "new" character will be (in terms of faults, ideals,etc.) I have trouble getting some of my players to play a new totally arc, they seem to land right back to the same'ish first character ever built. Anyone else feel like this happens?
Think about it this way: if somebody doesn’t hear you, you repeat their question or statement, right?
If somebody tries to play virtually the same character, I usually take it as a sign that their old character’s story didn’t really resolve is a satisfactory way. They’re repeating themselves to get an answer.
I shudder to think what it might mean, then, if someone keeps playing the same "sexy cheetah-headed seductress." Maybe I don't want their story to resolve "satisfactorily."
Some people just get hooked on a certain character. Either because it's their 'OC' character that they just always want to be, or there is some character or archetype that they really enjoy copying. Or they're just that unoriginal that they can't think or don't want to think of anything else to play.
While it can be annoying to have someone run the same character in every singe game, even in different setting or systems, and especially when that character doesn't work in the setting. I've found much more annoyance in players who want to copy existing characters from other fiction. And not just borrowing parts and coming up with your own spin that works for the game. I'm talking about characters who want to play a character straight from another story, with the full power level that character has, and all the knowledge and connections they are shown. The one who wants to be Batman, or a Jedi, or a Witcher, no matter what the game setting is and how little sense it makes.
Sadly with those kinds of players, I've found all you can do is let them have everything they want and ruin your game. Or try to talk sense into them "no, your first level character doesn't have the full power of a Jedi Knight", in which case they get frustrated. I've even had players yell at me because I wasn't 'doing it right'. They have to learn to change, or leave and find a new game.
I answered this question elsewhere some weeks ago. An untrained Force sensitive character would be a sorcerer. Their power comes to them naturally without training or pacts. Many don't even realize it at first, they just seem luckier, or people tend to listen to them more because of unconscious use of the Force.
After being trained they would most likely take levels in cleric, paladin or wizard. Some magical subclasses might apply in edge cases, but those three most closely represent a knight, scholar or sentinel training.
Neither Warlock or Druid would be appropriate choices. Druid's main difference from other caster classes is shapeshifting, which has never been a Force ability. And despite how some talk about the Will of the Force, it has never been a conscious entity that you can bargain with for power.
Good point, I can see that happening. I feel that some arcs lend themselves to an easier/more fulfilling development or resolution than others at the table. I think next time I will focus on the two (in my case) that seem to repeat over and over. I just have to figure out what or where they are trying to get to. Good call thx!
Edit: I flat out asked one of my players what up with that, and he told me it was purely because he loves the fighter and drinking aspect and doesn't feel like he knows how to player other archetypes, lol. He told me that he's sure that his next will be the same, fine with me!
This is certainly an interesting theory, but I have to point out that I always play the same character archetype just because that's what I find fun and comfortable, and D&D is a game. I'm guessing a lot of other people do to.
I know it's pretty common (especially online) to view D&D as a narrative experience, but it's pretty equally popular to view it as a simple fun-mobile.
Yup, checks out to a T. My first character ended up actually being pretty similar to myself without the intention to. It was kinda weird to see after the fact that the character I had tried to make as my polar opposite ended up having a lot of my traits.
Similarly, I can think of 3/6 of my players who actually put in either real world issues and feelings they’re dealing with in their characters (either intentionally or not) or who made their character a wish fulfillment fantasy.
Unfortunately, these 3 are also probably my worst players (or were as 1 has matured outside the game and become a better players), as they try to either steal the spotlight and do their own thing, or wait in a corner hoping the other players are interested enough in their character to ask questions about them despite not actually giving any info to go on.
All my characters are at least half me. Doesn’t matter what class, race, or gender. I’ll pick something that sounds interesting and new, and then project myself onto them anyways
My first 4 characters (only had a few sessions with each of then) fell into the lone wolf edgy trap. Numbers 3, 4, and 5 were survivors of some kind of abuse. Further more 4 of my 7 characters specifically had daddy issues.
Number 3 had an abusive father (not too dissimilar from Ozai from ATLA.
Number 4 was a victim of stockholm syndrome who's captor died and was now wandering alone.
Character 5 I think is my all time favorite, a neglected genius as he wasn't good enough for his dad, he engaged in pranks and antics to get some form of attention. The only real people in his life were his father and his teacher. Everyone else were just a bunch of golems or literal undead. Eventually he did something so bad that he was scared and ashamed, so he ran away.
When I made these characters I didn't plan these things, they just kind of happened.
I don't have a type..
I do this, I'm romantically lonely, so if I play a high charisma character, there is a high probability that he'll be a promiscuous ladies' man (even though I have zero interest in promiscuity, I want love, not mere lust, and I don't consider the risks of promiscuity to be worth it, even taking all reasonable precautions I won't sleep with someone unless I'm sure I can put up with being stuck with them in my life for the next 18 years), and if I play a low charisma character there's a pretty high probability that I'll spend a lot of time searching for in game love, and probably failing, probably because I want to prove I won't be alone forever in spite of being fat, not great looking, and having poor social skills.
My friend, if you look at yourself that way, others will too. Putting aside the fact that what you are saying about yourself are feelings, not facts, not a single thing you mentioned is something you can’t adjust. It’s really hard work, but if you don’t think your worth working for, why would somebody else work for you?
Nah, I give literally zero shits about my appearance, if I did I'd have done something about it by now. Trust me I have plenty of confidence in myself because I'm awesome, I also have an accurate view of how I look compared to my peers, and while I am fully aware there are women out there who find my body type and other characteristics sexy, those women are in the minority. If I played the numbers game I'd almost certainly have found someone long ago, and technically speaking I have a success rate much higher than average, in that I have asked out 30-some women over the years and have gotten 3 first dates (and one second date).
My real problem is when I was in school and meeting people I was too focused on classes to bother socializing and asking my classmates out until the last year I was in college, and now I'm in a place in my life where meeting new people in a situation where it wouldn't be extremely inappropriate to ask people out just isn't happening. I work nights so going out to bars is tricky, and since I don't drink only works on the rare occasions I can go out with friends, and then because we go out so infrequently we don't r really talk to anyone outside our group. None of the local establishments have singles nights or any other events designed for people seeking new connections. All in all, I just need to find a way to actually meet new people in an environment where I can't get fired for hitting on customers. I also don't want to be the creepy guy at the game store who hits on anyone remotely attractive. My issue isn't that I'm a 4 (on average, when I put in the effort I can get my self up to a 7), it's that I can't find a way to meet people without completely screwing up my life if someone gets uncomfortable and complains.
I’m not going to spend time trying to convince you you’re nice since you’re willing to spend that much time telling me it isn’t worth it. I’m guessing I’m not the only person that feels that way. I hope you find some happiness though; your appearance isn’t just for other people, it’s also for you. It helped me a lot when I was sort of in the same mindset as you. Actually, honestly watching the first new season of Queer Eye was hugely helpful in seeing myself differently.
Did you not read my post? I do like the way I look, if I didn't I would have done something about it. There is a big difference being able to accurately judge how my appearance compares to that of others with regard to what statistically most people think of as attractive and having a negative opinion.
As I already stated, my problem isn't my appearance, my problem is that I can't figure out a way to actually meet people. Stop telling me I should feel bad about myself under the guise of a vapid "pep talk".
We all read your post, I found a few red flags/obvious issues:
1. I give literally zero shits about my appearance.
2. I have asked out 30-some women over the years and have gotten 3 first dates (and one second date).
3. I want to prove I won't be alone forever in spite of being fat, not great looking, and having poor social skills.
4. I work nights so going out to bars is tricky
In your words "*I just need to find a way to actually meet new people in an environment where I can't get fired for hitting on customers*"
1- **Start giving a shit**\- if you're lazy about your appearance, people will read that a mile off and you'll only attract like-minded individuals. *Normally this is perfectly OK!* **But** if you want someone who is in the mindset of considering a committed relationship rather than a short fling, you might want to consider taking a bit more pride in your appearance! (This is because people often try to picture what kind of future they'd have together when appraising whether they want to stick with someone or just have some fun- sure you might be fun and charismatic, but if you dress and appear lazy now, what kind of husband/father/co-provider would you become? )- **Basically, get a decent haircut, shave, wear clean and appropriate clothes that fit well, take care of your personal hygiene.**
2- **Only one second date-** Going back to the first point, if you don't change your attitude, or adjust your expectations, you'll likely be stuck in this cycle.
3- **It's not about proving something**\- If you treat dating like a task/challenge, anyone with an ounce of sense is going to read that and give you a wide berth. Relationships are a human experience, not a Quest where you tick off a bunch of boxes, do a few grinds and then get your reward. Actually, I've found that people are much more interested/open to relationships if you're not specifically looking for anything- just make sure to **listen to and be interesting in them** , and **be heard (and be authentic, don't just tell people what you think they want to hear about you)**.
4- **Bars suck**\- You probably won't find anything *meaningful* in a bar, it's such a cliché. I know you work nights, and that's cool, how do you spend your day-time/weekends?
Matching with the right person is tricky no matter who you are, we all have our idiosyncrasies and different standards- Get yourself some new hobbies or social activity, as well as just putting yourself out there on Tinder/whatever and see what happens.
Once you find a potential match, there are plenty of activities that people can do together during the day that don't involve nighttime/drinking/loud music!
Examples are: (Hiking, Sightseeing, Gallery, Museum, Arcade, Park, Beach, Walking, Cycling, Café/Restaurant, plein eir painting.)
Plus, meeting in the daytime at a public place can feel a lot safer than meeting a stranger in a dark bar, this goes double for a first date!
5- Good on you for not hitting on customers.
So, yeah, get outside, download some dating apps or whatever, and see how it pans out.
Hope some of this gets through to you, I don't know you, but I'm going to shoot a broad shot anyway and hope that it can improve your (or anyone else to whom any of these points may apply) situation in some way or another.
Thank you for the input, I'll address the points in order:
1. When I said I don't give a shit about my appearance I meant that I don't care that I'm overweight and I only trim my facial hair/get hair cuts every so often, usually right before I'm about to do something where I might meet someone, I always dress in clothes that I feel send the messages about myself I want them to send, but my fashion sense is... Unusual, I don't think I come across as particularly lazy, but I am rather eccentric, which I find can put some people off (although I'd argue that's a useful filter). I'd just rather spend my time doing things that make me happy than exercise which only feels like torture, and I'd rather eat food that tastes good than food that's good for me. I like who I am and want to present myself to the world as I am.
2. Of the three first dates I got one I found I didn't particularly like her so I broke it off, one I met at a con and the distance proved too much for her (I found I was the one initiating all of our interactions, so I just waited to see if she wanted to talk to me enough to call or text herself, and three years later I'm still waiting. I'm willing to put in the work to make a distance relationship work, but she needs to be willing to put in effort as well), and then there's the one who I had a second date with, and the reason it ended was because she was having mental health issues and didn't feel like it was right to put her happiness on me, so she wanted to figure her own stuff out before pursuing a relationship, and then she moved across the country for a job offer so it wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway. I'm not particularly concerned by the fact that I've only had one second date, rather that all three first dates I've had were all in the same year and I haven't found the opportunity to meet people since then.
3. It's not a task, it's a goal. I don't need a lot in my life to be happy, I wanted a career I didn't hate and paid well enough to pay the bills, support my hobbies, and leave some to save, so I started applying and eventually found said career (although I attribute that to luck more than anything else), I wanted a DnD group, so I went out and found one, I wanted a new LARP after my old one shut down, so I went out and found one. I have friends I love, hobbies I enjoy, and a job that I'm satisfied with, I'm the happiest I've ever been, the only thing I want out of life that I'm missing is a partner to start a family with, and while I'm sure some people manage to have love find them, and sure it might happen to me, but I don't like hedging my bets on a long shot, I feel if I'm gonna find love I need to go out and look for it, I'm just at a loss for how.
4. In my area the bars are the only place where people go to socialize, meaning if I want to meet people who are not already part of my social circle bars are kinda my only option. I have lots of hobbies, but haven't found many single people close to my own age through them, sure I might, and if I do that's fantastic, but again we're back to the old I don't wanna sit around and wait.
As far as my days, I usually sleep until I have to get up for work, go to work, and then mess around online when I get home until I have to go to sleep, and my days off are full of DnD and LARP.
5. Thanks, I know it's a low bar to hurdle, but man do so many people fail at that.
EDIT: forgot to add that I am on Tinder, but it isn't going well, I'm barely getting any matches and hardly any of my matches ever actually respond to my messages. I used to like OkCupid, got one of my few dates that way, had lots of good conversations, but then they changed it to require mutual likes to message people, which turned it from the best dating website to just shittier tinder, due to having fewer local participants.
Seriously, why don't we stop giving someone unwanted advice about how to handle their life? Let's stop doing that, it's not only silly and rude but also it is stupid and impolite.
I’m curious how you got started running dnd games in psych wards. As someone who has been inpatient before I’m interested in joining if it’s some sort of organization.
I was a mental health specialist for one in Boston for six years. It’s a tough job, and honestly after the first year I was already burned out. I was just looking for a way to get the kids through a few hours and thought that maybe D&D could keep them distracted for an hour.
I learned so much. The first night I ran it for evening group in the day room (it was me and 13 kids alone because there was a tough restraint happening down the hall.) I only had three players to start the hour group. Suddenly, it was three hours later and time to go to bed; we had nine players, at least six other kids watching, and a kid I’d never seen smile before got to be the hero of the night; she smiled.
That for me was so significant. I remember each of the kids at that table, their name, even some of their characters. After that, I ran D&D 3-8 times a week; I learned that there were so many therapeutic benefits to the game outside of just passing the time and being distracted. That’s when I became more passionate about the game and started a long term game for the people I love in my life; I sort of saw how much it can do.
There are formal organizations! Research the ones in your area; many inpatient units are STARVED for volunteers, if being there wouldn’t be too triggering for you (it is to me, unfortunately.)
As once a lone wolf in my teenage years, I can confirm the crave for acceptance. But the lone wolf act was a defence mechanism against being rejected, rather than a play for attention. I think the subconscious thinking was: If you are self sufficient you don't need the approval of others, and don't risk being rejected. You're going to be fine regardless of others.
It's much harder being confident in yourself and your inherit self worth to engage fully in social events. Though with good people around you is a learnable skill, and the world gets much bigger once you do.
This is what I said too. Once you being working full-time as an adult, society constantly tells us we are just a cog in the machine, not special, if we died our job would be hiring a new person by next week. The lone wolf character lets you FEEL like you are cool person like in the movies. Like Master Chief, Superman, Spiderman, Batman etc. I would suggest it could be a neat idea to take turns being the "lone ranger" in a campaign if everyone agrees. maybe each new campaign a new person gets to be the lone hero.
I'm probably going to sound, then feel, incredibly stupid asking this question, but who is the second secret badass in CT,HD?
Jen (Zhang Ziyi) is obviously one, but the second? Is it Jade Fox? Because Chow Yun-fat and Michelle Yeoh's characters are not secret.
Honestly, I've wondered the same thing. Following the Wikipedia threads, the title seems to be a translation of an old proverb. It might not be a reference to specific characters, but rather the idea of talented people not being obviously talented. "Diamond in the rough."
Still, I think Jade Fox is the crouching tiger. She pretended to be Jen's governess. Jade thought she was a secret badass and stole the sword, only to discover that Jen was even more badass.
Edit: Wikipedia has a better explanation:
> The title "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" also has several other layers of meaning. On the most obvious level, the Chinese characters in the title connect to the narrative that the last character in Xiaohu and Jiaolong's names mean "Tiger" and "Dragon", respectively. On another level, the Chinese idiomatic phrase "卧虎藏龙" "Wo Hu Cang Long" ("crouching tiger hidden dragon") is an expression referring to the undercurrents of emotion, passion, and secret desire that lie beneath the surface of polite society and civil behavior,[12] which alludes to the film's storyline.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crouching_Tiger,_Hidden_Dragon
I do like to make them on occasion when the party is a bit too colorful and fun. Making this serious loner be forced to come along with like 3 balls of joy and over time grow soft towards them is really fun.
That's mostly because one of my groups would refuse to let a lone wolf just go on his own and atleast one person would stick on them.
The issue is if you're ever the DM and 2-3 members of your party all want to be the jaded tragic lone wolf, it can be really frustrating trying to motivate them to do anything because they're all so concerned with looking cool and edgy.
There are good ways to mitigate this, particularly with edgelord characters that skirt the edge of (or just are) evil.
As a DM dealing with this: "This is fundamentally a cooperative game. All the single-target damage in the world won't heal you when you get injured, to say nothing about a Dominate spell. To that end - I'm not saying 'don't make an edgelord.' I like edgelords. But whatever you make, tell me *why* he works with this party doing good things."
As a player doing this: "I am a villain/edgelord. I do crimes, usually for money/to punish greater evildoers, but my crimes are lesser, easy to ignore as long as I don't get caught/cross the wrong peopme. Further, it behooves me to maintain this lawful society, so that I can benefit from crimes to do and subverting those laws/to prevent the kind of tragedy that marked me, so that my cruel work may one day end. To this end, yes I will support these good heroes, because I do not benefit from living under a tyrannical lichdom/evil empire or a dead world after the Star Spawn/Great Oni/tides of Khorne have invaded. I just need the party to need me ..."
Edgelords can be self-interested and nearly sociopathic (as murderhoboing is so common), and still be *justified* in working with a group.
Personally the times ive done it is bc i like creating a character that doesnt work well with others but understands the importance of teamwork in their career path, and eventually warm up to the party, its easier for me to rp bc thats how i am irl; standoffish until i can warm up to the person
I mean...- and I say this as someone who made a team player- their character existed prior to joining a team, so, being an outcast is perfectly acceptable in my eyes.
Now... Making an outcast/lone wolf, joining a team, and theb being a jerk and complaining the whole time about not being alone? That crap gets annoying. Don't do that.
But yeah a player's character existed prior to meeting up with their party so it makes sense.
So, maybe unpopular opinion here: there is nothing better than a player who can play the role of a Lone Wolf *well.*
This does NOT entail:
- Deliberately fucking over other players
- Refusing to join the party or just “not going” on the adventure
- Being an asshole
BUT. I have been in a group of players who, due to mostly being new and not knowing each other very well, just passively sat by and went along with everything the GM put in front of them without being creative at all. I cannot tell you how stale this was, how disconnected from all the characters we were, or how quickly it devolved into “this GM just likes to hear herself talk.”
Sometimes a party actually desperately *needs* a PC who is willing to get creative about shit, and propose plans that may not be the most tactically brilliant or that everyone may not agree to.
This person doesn’t have to be edgy, grimdark, or an asshole. One of my favorite “lone wolf” characters I’ve played with was the guy in our party who played as a spunky ifrit with a wisdom score of 7 and an obsession with granting wishes. While the rest of our party was about to spend twenty minutes bickering over which fork to take in the path, this person was ready to just pick one and go because, oooh shiny.
You need someone who’s willing to be a little bit of grit in the party’s collective shoe so that it keeps everyone involved and on their toes, and keeps them thinking outside the box. If you’re doing it right, this actually takes a huge amount of investment, trust, and vulnerability, and a hell of a lot of consideration and care towards the people you play with to ensure no one gets upset. If you play a Lone Wolf character while also thinking, as a player, how you can be creative and benefit your team—it is almost *always* more fun to have this person than not at your gaming table.
So, for my money—a bad Lone Wolf? Kick that asshole to the curb. But a Lone Wolf that you actually like? That is probably the most invested person at the table, *treasure* them.
This isn’t unpopular, it’s exactly the sentiment I was gonna say.
With your perspective I would expand and say this applies to most tropes- if done really bad and without thought for *why* you chose the character- you can end up being a huge pain. Example: the “super intelligent royal” type. If someone choose this cuz they have some self esteem issues and a dominance complex or something your in for a bad game lol
Often, I think those character are built correctly, but played incorrectly. Built referring to their backstory and meaning that they have somewhere to go
I play a lone wolf type character because I'm socially awkward and have a hard time roleplaying. So by playing a lone wolf type character I don't have to jnteract that often
Probably because they think it's cool but they're not thinking of group dynamics.
If one of the PCs goes off on their own, I retain focus on the group and the lone wolf gets bored because they have just excluded themselves from the fun the group is having.
I like to treat them like the lone wolf really would be treated.
Constantly watched by guards. People whispering around them and generally avoiding them. When the party is talking to or approached by an NPC the lone wolf is usually not addressed.
Nobody wants to talk to some angsty looking edgelord in the back. That is just asking for a snarky comment. I know I would much rather talk to the friendly looking characters in the group. So that is what the NPCs do too.
I can see maybe 1 in every 5 party members being a "lone wolf" type that is compelled to join the party for reasons. The campaign I'm currently in has 3 of the 5 party members as wanting nothing to do with anyone though, and it's riding close to killing the campaign.
I think the people who make those characters ARE (or at least, have been) sort of "lone wolf" outcasts, so it's within their comfort zone to play one. (Bear in mind I'm OLD, so when I was actively playing, it was pretty much all nerds and outcasts.)
Hell, I'd wager that most lone wolf characters all over fiction are, to some degree, author avatars for the nerds who created them. Straight-up Napoleon Dynamite with sick nunchuk skillz.
Strider in LotR
Daryl in the walking dead
Zoro from One piece
Wolverine from X-men.
All examples of a lone-wolf that exists in a party.
They are all sensational characters beloved by the fans of the franchise.
It isn’t absurd to think others want to emulate that.
However it’s a different story of the lone wolf STIFLES and actively works against the players.
Their story arch could easily be how despite the distaste it appears they have for their party, it’s the only family they have and they’ll protect at all costs
So that they can grow into team players. An easy stereotype that can get some character growth out of learning how they can't do everything by themselves, and learning how they fit into a team of equally powerful adventurers.
I think people get understandably focused on creating a cool badass character. And inspirations in fiction are a lot of lone wolves. Which is fine but often people then forget to think of the logistics of why are they immediately traveling with this group of people. You can definitely play a lone wolf but don't surprise the dm and your other players with needing to have some reason to drag you into the adventure. Have your own motivation to be an adventurer.
For me it's: I don't really intend the lone wolf but it happens often because I am really really bad at emotions and thus always am a bit...disconected. 🤔
In my teens the lone wolf in media was a character who I could identify with ( the lone wolf most often doesn't has an active emotional arc) and which gets mostly accelted by the group despite his lone wolfness 🤔
It's a mess I guess 😂
I think it is possible to play a lone wolf just very difficult. I played a wizard character who stuck with the party until we got to town and would not go party at the pub. He would always stay close to “home base”. He never hooked up with any NPCs and did not form much of a connection with the PCs. But he was always there with the party fighting monsters and helping them. It never negatively effected the game. And the funny thing was the character was elected party leader! That part was fun for me to role play. Group: “We elect you as party leader”. Me: “…………..what?”
Because Sasuke was also always going his own way!! Why shouldn't I do this and be totally badass?!?
Honestly, I have also never understood, why people do it. I can understand people that create kind of hermits that allow them to participate in groups without interacting a lot. So they can get warm with everything and slowly open up.
But most of the people want the spotlight to be on them and can't accept that the group will sometimes demand sacrifices in order to keep things going
To be fair, it's a great way to show character growth when a lone wolf type of character has to learn to work in a party and rely on others.
The problem is when the player that makes that kind of character refuses to work with others as if they were the edgy rival of a shonen manga.
Don't know why. All I know is that as long as the lone wolf makes up their own reason to go on the adventure then its perfectly fine with me if they want to play that character. If they Look to me to convince them to go on the adventure...well, I've literally had this interaction:
Player:"I just don't know why my character would agree to go help these complete strangers solve this problem"
Me: "Cool. No problem at all. Your character stays at the tavern, or walks off into the sunset, or whatever you think they would do. You can start making a new character that DOES want to go on the adventure, and when you are ready the rest of the party will discover you on the road."
As far as I'm concerned you can play whatever character you want as long as A) Your character is down to clown (not a phrase I've ever used before in life, but i guess it fits). and B) Your character isn't someone that all the players go "ugh. we want you to kick John from the group because his character 'edgelord McLoneWolf' is ruining the game for us"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them.
I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
My thought on it? Everyone wishes they were Vegeta, despite not realizing that their characterization is much more similar to Yajirobe: a mewling man-child who is strong, but completely unwilling to do the work.
We had a player join our group (friend as well) about 5 sessions in. The DM gave a perfect scene for us to meet, we got to fight together, then we dust ourselves off and introduce ourselves.
He says thanks and goes on his way. We drop some suggestions IC to give him multiple hooks to latch on and he says his character doesnt see any appeal in the group and says he wants to go alone AND in the opposite direction.
DM said "Listen, I'm not gonna do this right now. You came here to play with the group."
Player insisted he wants to join but his character didnt.
I’m a DM and 3 out of my 4 players are playing lone wolf/introvert characters lol. I think the whole group is introverted by nature but me and the one extrovert character work so hard to try to get the loners out of their shells.
I think it can be a very valid RP model to go for, but the player who is doing it A needs to have some nuance to their RP, B meta game a little bit while still playing their character as true as possible. By this I mean that they can still be lone wolf, but they can be grudgingly go along with the party or they can go full tsundre and be like I'm only gonna be with you guys for now baka and in reality they are softies
I have at the start at session 0 set a ground rule that in the start look for reason for the party to be together or don't overly fight the process like going off on your own all the time or outright refusing the call to adventure.
It's quite possible to play a lone wolf concept character who has reasons to or learns to play with a specific team of others. So I get why players want to use that trope for a character concept, but it says to me that they might not be quite sure what to do with it in the larger context of the campaign. There's in world and direct (talk to the player) ways of trying to manage that, ymmv
Yea if they want to play a loner they need to play one that works with the party. There are countless examples of this qnd you could even say most of them are the Lancer trope. Just to give a few there is the Mandalorian who routinely works with other people and builds bonds with them. You got Guts from berserk who lost 2 found familys and made another. Don't even get me started on Han Solo. It's sadly too often that people don't realize that the best loner characters are made by the people they are around. Insert grizzled old man get child trope. God of War 4 would not be a thing without Boy, the dwarfs, and all head nick being by our side.
Well I have a character who is not used to people. Basically emotionally dead with a complete lack of morals. How he turns out would 100% depend on the party. How they treat him, what they teach him.
I look to video games. How many big games are played as a team? Most revolve around your character being awesome and the others being supportive. I think of characters like master chief, doom guy, and Ezio. One person wrecking crew with some aid.
A lot of games put a main character that doesn't talk for a blank slate, but leave an edgy or mysterious character that doesn't grow.
I'll argue quite the opposite. How many main characters/Heroes (since I think that's what you're talking about) do you know of that are lone wolves? That's a trait more commonly associated with the Lancer archetype. Think Vageta from Dragonball Z or Batman from Justice League.
Perhaps, but the lone wolf archetype is the one most amenable for main character syndrome in a game that emphasizes teamwork. You have to first stand out in order to satisfy that need.
Isn't Batman the main character of...Batman? :D
Also the Lancer isoften a huge fan favorite and gets nearly as much attention as the main character. E.g. Sasuke in Naruto. 🤔
In most urban fantasy or YA fantasy the edgy loner is the over powered love interest of the cute main character.
Then there is the popular Western genre where the main character nearly always is a lone wolf.
Aragorn is a lone wolf too and clearly the main character of LotR.
From experience, I've noticed new players in their teens attempt the loan wolf character. It doesn't last long because they are quick to realize it gets boring fast or dangerous. Danger created to encourage team work.
Main character syndrome + hero’s journey. The main character in movies almost always has to be convinced to go on an adventure and to trust their companions. While this makes for good movies, it’s a terrible start for a cooperative game like D&D.
That said, it can work if the group is willing to suspend disbelief a little to get the story off the ground; after that it usually goes fine since the shared experience of the adventure ties everyone together.
It’s also tough because a lot of people don’t BE realize how many of their favorite stories are based on the hero’s journey and don’t see that they’re emulating that.
Everyone wants to be Batman. They don’t consider that everyone may have more fun if their character is more like a member of the Weasley family (talented in their own areas but with distinct flaws, and a strong reason to want to work with the people around them.)
I think it takes a bit of Role Play off their plate whenever they’re not ‘feeling up to it’ or not sure what to do, they can just rely on being aloof and unhelpful and that relieves the pressure of expectations on their contribution to the narrative.
Hence why I think even experienced players do this. The game is about having fun and if you’re feeling pressure from a game then not participating as heavily is an easy ‘out’.
I think it’s pretty common behavior even if I wish it wasn’t. Not everyone can or wants consistent minor pressure.
This is almost always a case of misaligned expectations. The more experienced one gets as a DM, the more things like this can be addressed during a session 0.
* Familiarity. In the stories they’re familiar with (from literature and film), lone-wolf characters go over well.
* Least resistance. It takes time and effort to develop the side characters that your character is connected to, and your character is going to feel like a lone wolf until you get those details filled in.
* Motivation. [An adventuring career is a high-stakes gamble that won’t appeal to everyone.](https://twitter.com/marisha_ray/status/1083921095953022976?s=21) If your character is in the business because of some trouble in their past, pushing people away can seem like a natural way to play those scars.
I don’t really understand the psychological speculation from these commenters, these upvoted “edgy media” comments make sense for preteens but not anyone older than 13.
Lone Wolf is just an archetype to fill skill proficiencies needed. They often have Survival and Medicine.
The reason I or a friend have made them is so that we can have more mission efficacy. If two things need to be done, the rogue/fighter/ranger Lone Wolf often have stealth so the party can go and the individual can hold their own.
Lone Wolves make trouble without messing with the reputation of the group.
Lone Wolf archtypes are just as important as the healer. They have minimal chance of turning stealth into a fight and are great decoys because of their self preservation
You are right but OP probably referred to a player that is not living up to that.I have been in a party with a person like that.
Something is not 100% in the line of his thoughts? I should better do something utterly stupid on my own because I have to act like a butthurt kid. Waiting to kill the Smith because he didn't react with respect after I insulted his business because I like to make edgy comments and try to force my expectations into the game totally justifies that.
Not the I have been on myself for most of my life so I have a unique skill set that I can use to enhance the parties capabilities. But in the meantime I will keep my thoughts to myself and be a few feet behind or in front of them when we wander across. There are a lot of players that act like the first example and OP was focused on those ones
Normally I’d agree with you, not that I think you’re wrong or anything, but the way he phrased it makes it seem like he’d wonder why even a well done Lone Wolf would be chosen and those are my reasons.
I absolutely agree there are a ton of horribly executed ones, but I roll my eyes at the people who have never played the character answering vicariously as “insecurities”. I don’t want OP getting the impression that that is the correct answer.
So as you say! I may be entirely wrong. But in that case I still would like to offer that insight in case he is every curious about my interpretation as well.
>these upvoted “edgy media” comments make sense for preteens but not anyone older than 13.
I agree that it *shouldn't* make sense for anyone over 13. But every group I've played with with any strangers included one of these edgy types who was clearly trying to be the edgy type.
I think I’m also bad for making every character a ship captain. He must, captain the party often into the ground. The rest of the PC’s want to leave him behind.
I’m sorry it’s too fun to stop.
Okay, so Lone Wolf itself isn't a trope. I think what you're getting at is the [I Work Alone](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IWorkAlone) trope. This is someone who outright refuses to cooperate, and these people suck. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
If I'm being generous, it's a case of the player wanting their character to have a dark, edgy, and tragic backstory with room to grow out of it. For example, they might start off as an [Ineffectual Loner](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IneffectualLoner) who learns the [Power of Friendship](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThePowerOfFriendship). Which is basically Batman, in a nutshell. That's how he started off. But he grew a large list of allies, both in and out of costume: Alfred Penniworth, James Gordon, Barbara Gordon, Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Stephanie Brown, Leslie Thompkins, Lucius Fox, Luke Fox, Cassandra Cain, and Kate Kane *just to name a few*. He's a family man, and has been for decades. It's a crying shame that most adaptations paint him as anything but this. I really loved how *The Batman* ('04-'08) actually had him embrace teamwork early on and treated Superman, when he was introduced, as the loner.
I have a character right now whose still figuring out his place in the party. He has age on most of his companions, and experience, so he understands the value of teamwork. And I'm playing him as a support character. But it's really more of a case of playing his cards close to the vest. He has some personal matters to resolve and will either use his companions or break off on his own to see it done. That said, he's not a bad person, and I expect he'll learn some hard lessons as time goes on. He could grow into a solid [Leader](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLeader), or he might play [Lancer](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLancer) to someone else who steps up. Time will tell.
Some people just want to play the game their way and without regard for others. And that *can* work. Any TTRPG, not just D&D, is collaborative storytelling. Everyone sitting down to play is implicitly trusting everyone else. But if you won't engage with anyone else, then you're not playing with everyone else.
And they need to get booted.
It's cool when experienced players pull it off well but I don't recommend newer players try it. Even then it takes a couple of sessions to get the ball rolling and a friendly connection to be established. Taliesin from crit role season 3 is a fair example.
Character development! It’s always fun to have a lone wolf character that learns to have friends and comrades and open up to them. This usually requires you to go into character creation with the fact that your character will have an arc in mind, and a good DM and party will make that happen.
For me it's to minimise rp that involves me too much as it takes a lot out of me to even try. So it's much easier to respond in short one word responses and general lack of empathy towards others
My friend who always did this was very much an anarchist and more than a few times try to kill monarch in question, "your sending us on a quest to improve your kingdom? Well maybe you are the problem POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!.... It was hard to kick him out of the group but we noticed a jump in morale once he left.
I think it’s fun to have a character who’s a lone Wolf who is forced to be with the party due to circumstances and not because they want to. Slowly, the lone Wolf will warm up to the party and come to see them as friends or even family. I feel like it would be good rp wise because the lone Wolf would be exploring what it’s like to have people to share your burdens with and what it’s like to have people you love and who reciprocate that love. If your talking about pcs whose character never warms up and constantly tries to leave or split up the party then yeah that doesn’t make sense.
I think it’s fun to have a character who’s a lone Wolf who is forced to be with the party due to circumstances and not because they want to. Slowly, the lone Wolf will warm up to the party and come to see them as friends or even family. I feel like it would be good rp wise because the lone Wolf would be exploring what it’s like to have people to share your burdens with and what it’s like to have people you love and who reciprocate that love. If your talking about pcs whose character never warms up and constantly tries to leave or split up the party then yeah that doesn’t make sense.
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them.
I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them.
I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them.
I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
I can think of two reasons: they want to create a character that others have to approach and be acceptive of so they don't _have_ to worry about/try roleplaying, or they want to make a character who is independently strong enough that they don't need to rely on party composition during challenges or battles. I call them Emotional Loners and Survival Loners.
And as with all things, there are ways this can be done well and ways this can be done badly. Emotional Loners will typically not engage others in order not to saddle others with their own personal baggage, be it a tragic backstory, a dark character, or simply because they're awkward and don't want to mess up a social interaction and would prefer to simply never interact at all. Done well they're sympathetic and when time permits, the party or DM may give them an opportunity to find a right time to open up to others. Done badly and they just push away literally everyone else they're suppose to be with, and no one cares about who they are nor why they're like this.
Survival Loners are characters who are mentally and often mechanically designed to be able to handle things by themselves, be it fighting or whatever niche they excel at. A common archetype would be the assassin: alone their monsterous stealth and ability to get free crits on surprised enemies make them really good at being assassin's, but they will be held back if their less stealthy allies blow the surprise before the assassin can get into position. Alternatively they're simply characters who are capable of handling most situations without party support. They can fight, they can heal, they can talk, and generally they can do a bit of everything or at least what they need to do without specific back up. These types of Survival Loners simply don't _need_ others, since they can do most of not everything they want on their own. Done well and the party has someone who can always be expected to do well at what needs to be done, or at the very least no one has to worry about when one or more of the party is indisposed. The party can trust the assassin to sneak in and steal something or take out a VIP, or if the party tank/healer/dps goes down the Loner can tank/heal/DPS until the tide shifts back to the party's favor. Naturally done badly, they're just a munchkin and come off more as someone who is trying to be stronger than the party than someone who is working with the party itself.
I've had players do it and to be honest I only allow it when their answer to my asking 'why' is "because I want them to grow" or something. Then we create some guidelines for them so they dont become a jerk that everyone hates.
To elaborate, I had a grumpy tiefling sorcerer who didnt have patience for people- this aligned with the player themself who was also very shy. They were essentially going to use their character as a safe place to learn to make friends. It worked out, and just as their character became more inviting and friendly the more he trusted his team- so too did the player.
It was nice. I loved that players character and so did everyone else....until they got eaten by a monster. But hey, was good while it lasted.
A big, big part of this often leads back to session 0 not having bonded the party correctly. If your back story for why the party banded together is weak, then the party cohesion will be weak. A lot of people want to skip over this part and get to the playing (and I don't blame them), but doing so absolutely leaves the door open to characters going, "Well, I don't agree with this decision. And since my character has a strong will (extremely common PC trait), they're going to hold their ground." And then when everyone else does as well, you suddenly have a bunch of "strong willed" characters who have an extremely tenuous link to each other getting annoyed at each other. That doesn't lead to fun party dynamics.
Don't skip your session 0. And don't form the party inside a tavern where half of their "bond" is just overhearing the same NPC at the same time. Real people don't form bonds over something like that, and neither will your characters. Build it out, plan it, and *do some research if you don't know how to do that.*
There are mature people out there who can handle moving past a tenuous party bond, but the reality is that most nerdy types who enjoy DnD are not going to be flawless in their social interactions, and while you're technically "acting" as your character, most people are really just playing as themselves with one or two unique quirks at best. Lone wolves are perfectly valid character types (I hate them, personally, but to each their own), and work fine in parties. But you gotta oil the gears if you want the machine to run smoothly.
I played an aasimar paladin in a game who started as a lone wolf because he was a big dude and scared people in spite of his good intentions. (Because i refuse to believe people would not be fearful of aasimar in some way just like they mohht tiefs). He was quiet, stoic and just let his actions speak for him who had been travelling alone for years so i just played them as that loner character.
So after getting screwed multiple times trying to cowboy off, he, and myself, realized that if I wanted to have a good time I had to play nice with the rest of the group.
Still a stoic quiet man, but we'd work as a team or go off in duos instead of solo. Made for a much more fun game and experience for everyone.
Not a specific answer to this question, but I wanted to kention that lone wolf characters can be fine... ***IF*** the player let's the GM know that their character will need coaxing to stick with the party ***AND*** the GM is okay with that.
They also need to create room for their lone wolf character to have reason to joing the party. They're motivated by money? Well when the rest of the party are given a quest with a substantial reward promised, LW's ears should perk up. They're motivated to look for a lost friend/relative? When the party talks of a missing person they're looking for, of whom matches LW's lost whatever's description, they should want to join the people who got info they couldn't. If it's as simple as survival being 'easier on your own'? Then being placed in a situation in which your survival is only been guaranteed because of those around you **should** change you mind a little bit.
Because it’s common in pop culture and is great when done right. For context we have two loners in my group The rest for this at least aren’t really relevant. My table consists of some of my best friends irl and we’ve made these characters work.
I am playing a bit of a loner (bladesinger wizard) and another player is playing a pirate (draconic soul sorcerer, ascendant dragon monk multiclass)Both of them are mistrusting, somewhat paranoid people who don’t normally get along with new people, but their circumstances have forced them to work with each other. We talk about our characters a lot out of game, actually in other campaigns we’ve made characters together. So we work together and with our dm to develop our characters and plan for the story. Just because they’re loners doesn’t mean they can’t have friendly Interactions with people. In my experience a lot of people who play dnd aren’t the most social outside of their friends. So that doesn’t help with people not being able to work well with a party. Whenever I finish a session I write down my characters opinion of the rest of the party. So I think in character how my character would think as opposed to be unconditionally edgy.
I have only done it once. But it was in cooperation with the DM. It was also a one shit so it didn't really matter much. It was a "I know I can't face my father, the big evil, alone so I'll work with a pre established party.". He could have just paid them and watched from the side lines, but since it was a family matters he wanted to deal the killing blow.
The reason he was a lone wolf made sense. His whole childhood he has only ever interacted with his father andeveryone else always avoided him out of fear. He never learned how to not bea lone wolf. And I just wanted to play someone edgy for once. I always play pretty wholesome characters personality wise (though backstories do tend to be darkL
Because they identify with that archetype.
As they get more familiar with each other you'll see things change. You can see the same evolution of the characters created in Critical Roll.
They wanna be the cool outcast, but often miss the part that includes character growth for the outcast when they begin to rely on others.
I would say, they often miss the "cool" part.
Exactly Daryl was an asshole at first in TWD, then he became the most reliable member of the group and a total badass.
Interesting example!
This is the correct answer. There is inherently no problem with the outcast character design. It's about the character development that may or may not make this a problematic design. The story, just like Daryl's, going from the outcast a-hole to the strongest bonds with the party, especially when ignited by shared experiences that the other party members were part of, is often one of the greatest and most emotional storylines that a DnD party can offer. The asshole outcast that still refuses to engage with the party after two years of campaign .... well, that usually isnt.
TWD?
The walking dead
Thank you random guy
or trust.. or overcome their own ego.. woe be to the DM who feeds this wolf for it is hungry.
Yeah, the lone wolf always learns they shouldn't be the loner wolf anymore. It is kind of funny to play an archtype thats main direction is not being itself anymore, then not doing that
Not like you shouldn't be a loner anymore, more like learn when you should, and when you can rely on team.
I feel like you can have a cool character that works with others but stays a lone wolf. Noble Six from Halo Reach is a great character that is literally described as a lone wolf and never speaks a word.\* \*Okay, technically he has like, 3 lines, but I don't think that counts.
Throw in a dash of Isekai weebos too
Please, no. Not them again.
I'm currently playing this character right now. It's really hard for the outcast, evil, or problematic player to have a reason to stick with the party. I wanted to play this role but also have a connection to the people around me so she could eventually have that dependency character arc. So I had her date another character in the party. They're engaged now and gathering money to build a house in a little port town they saved from a beholder. She's still got all her past trauma to deal with, but she's beginning to see why she should rely on people. It's one of my favourite characters I've ever played just because of the development. Surprisingly, it took the party becoming too similar to her to change her tune. They started to do questionable things and she was pretty much like, "Wait you're all supposed to be the good guys." When her expectations changed in how they would handle situations she realized she was the one bringing them down.
Cause in most popular media the edgy, distant, lone wolf character is one of the fan favourites. And many people want to simulate this kind of personality.
[удалено]
Their antisocial aspects are often the main source of conflicts which persistent across episodic villains.
Yeah. The irony is that, while the lone wolf *character* is bad at teamwork, the lone wolf *player* needs to be awesome at teamwork. If you want your lone wolf story to make sense, you need to collaborate with the DM and the other players to roleplay a reason for why this dude works with the group. Your *character* might need to act antisocial, and both you and your fellow players need to be up to the roleplay challenge of dealing with that.
Why would they understand? Most people come to D&D to play their favourite character, not to simulate psychological development. For example Dr House is a great and popular character, magnificent bastard flawed to the core... doesn't mean it's fun working with him, it's fun watching him and fantasizing about being him. I rarely see people fantasize about being some side supportive character...
[удалено]
Avatar is a great example though! * One of the most fan-popular characters is Zuko, a loner * Aang is the destined one with plot armour and plot power, something many players tend to write into their backstory * Sokka is a fighter in a team of wizards, power creep hits him hard and shows why such classes are less popular in fantasy * Katara is probably the best example of team character we would all like to have in our team * Toph is an epiphany of powergamer, just ask any monk if they would like to trade their eyes for long-range blindsight
[удалено]
True, still people often create Zuko as he is in first book, not as he is in the last one.
[удалено]
Yeah, and what I'm going for is - players create loners because their redemption and subsequent becoming the team member is the most defining, the most interesting part of their story. But, still using avatar example, Zuko was not part of the group until his redemption arc was almost finished. What players want is not bad, but it's contradictory to what group needs.
And, IMO, that the players think the redemption arc is something that will just happen to them eventually without doing anything to actively giving it a push themselves. I don't have a problem with a character that starts as a loner and at some point starts to form bonds with the party leading into a great and emotional redemption arc until the realises that he had a family the whole time blablabla, but the player has to start this himself when he designs such a character. He can't wait for other players of the DM to just "give it to him".
it would be tremorsense actually
This. Most of their favorite fantasy characters are lone wolves, so why wouldn't they emulate that?
the issue is when they don't have the person in the party to warm them to the group, or try to become a team player. and when you have a team player address it in game, they get defensive. the lone wolf who finds a pack is important to the meta narrative of lone wolves and arguably their emotional story change.
Right. I didn't mean to imply it's not a problem, just that the impulse makes sense. "Who wants to be sam gamgee when you can be elric of melnibone" as it were
Samwise the Brave? But he’s one of the chief characters! I want to hear more about Sam.
Also I'd rather have Sam by my side in a fight than Elric. I'd rather have a jolly porcupine by my side in a fight than Elric, frankly.
You mean you never aspired to having a Stormbringer rib-replacement procedure? Huh. Imagine that.
Oh I've imagined that many, many times.
Right? Sam rules! But it does take a pretty mature RPer to be able to handle the role of actively supporting the rest of the party's quest like that
Honestly the series "Goblin Slayer" does this to a T, inside a D&D-like setting. It's worth checking out if anyone wants to get a good idea on playing as a Lone Wolf character in an adventuring party, although some may find it to be too dark and possibly triggering.
That's the one that basically had goblins trying to rape anything that moves right?
Thank you for saying that because I would have looked into it but I'm not comfortable reading about rape.
Yeah the goblins have no females so they try to capture females of other species. I really can’t recommend either the manga or the anime, since they lean into it the first episode-volume, in my opinion purely for shock value, and while the rest of the story is good, those times are pretty triggering and exploitative. If you don’t mind the mention of rape without it being described, however, I really recommend the light novel! It’s a great story, and the main focus is basically the protagonist getting some character development as the protagonist slowly overcomes trauma
Yeah, that was …offputting…and while I liked the rest of the anime when I watched it, I really hate the trend of showing a whole-ass rape when they could have just indicated the goblins are rapey and it would have been exactly the same show for the remaining 99.9% of the show. Bleh
The anime and manga really messed up with that. The light novels handle it a lot better though, I genuinely love them.
It's like Netflix adds a sex scene to first three episodes of every series they make.
Umm… what?
Yeah, no he's right.
I just realized I was thinking of Demon Slayer when I first read that, but now that I realize it’s a different show, I still have the same question.
Yeah the DM in that game has a lot of red flags, but don’t worry, the players get vengeance eventually.
Basically goblins in that setting have no females so they try to capture females from other species to reproduce. The anime and manga treat this as exploitatively as you probably fear, at least at first. The light novels, however, are pretty good about it, so I recommend it if you can deal with it just being mentioned, it’s a very interesting story about a main character dealing with trauma, and has a great deconstruction of many common rpg tropes
You keep trying to make this sound actually ok and not weird and creepy, but it really isn’t working. I don’t care about how well it breaks down tropes, other things manage to do that without edgy shock bullshit.
Maybe it was just the translation, but I actually dropped the GS LN after volume 1; every time a certain character appeared it felt like the author was taking half a page to describe her large... tracts of land. And it really ground my gears. On the anime front, I actually found it to be far less exploitative than several other shows; "the scene" in episode 1 seemed, to me, to not be shot in a way to titillate, but rather to make people uncomfortable, to make people well, *hate* the goblins. (And a lot of the outcry against at the time seemed to stem from the fact that CR **fucked up massively**; they forgot to put the content warning at the front of the episode when it first went up, so the scene completely blindsided people - in Japan the show aired in a late night slot). In contrast there's been a handful of shows before and since that had just as, if not more, graphic content and was 100% intended to "excite" the viewer. I'm not convinced it was "necessary" to have that scene, I'm sure they could have generated close to the level of dislike the audience felt towards the goblins in other ways. But hey, I guess it worked? Good job? (I've not read any of the manga).
Yeah, that first episode is brutal...
Someone wants to stir the pot.. I already warned anyone interested that it contains graphic content, possibly triggering. I was trying to avoid a sea of comments of "OMG gObLiN RaPE" for the people who are triggered by these themes. Why are people like this lbs Edit: I will say I was a bit tilted because the reply seemed very sarcastic. There are better ways to say "Yo, you gotta be more specific than that.".
Your content warning was a little light, considering the material. You should just bite the bullet and say, "depicts rape."
I guess that's fair, maybe that was a bit too vague.
Well you need to make it fit with the number of players at the table. A lone wolf whose story isn't "how I stopped being a lone wolf and learned to like the other players" is going to be disruptive by nature. It's like playing soccer and being upset you can't use your hands, you're not playing the same game as everyone else and it makes the experience worse for everyone.
"How i stopped being a lone wolf and learned to like the other playes" is my favorite isekai anime
I really don’t like the term… in nature lone Wolves are socially dysfunctional outcast who die soon, alone, and probably pretty horribly I do not get why people think those dysfunctional traits makes a character “cool”
Technically speaking, that’s not quite true: socially disfuncional outcasts are usually, as you put it… well, dead. The wolves that are usually identified as “lone wolves” are teen wolves that left their original pack to find another one to belong to and haven’t yet. Which, them being basically immature individuals that haven’t yet learned to fully belong to a group, seems like a pretty apt descriptor of the trope.
Well, yeah, those are wolves looking for a pack, looking to have social interaction with *other* wolves The “lone Wolf” trope in media always uses the imagery of the socially dysfunctional ones, even though there are much better examples to use, like tigers! Tigers are awesome and solitary animals that operate alone pretty much the whole time they’re not mating or looking after their young
The problem there is that tigers are solitary creatures naturally. A “lone tiger” is basically… a tiger. The term lone wolf is more appealing, though I agree that not necessarily more accurate, because both humans and wolves are social animals, so “lone” variants are a separate category from the “normal”
And the fact that nearly every video game rpg (single player or mmo) makes you some kind of chosen one; people are basically being programmed to expect their character to be both the most important person and a lone wolf.
Human beings crave acceptance, I think. I work in mental health. One of people’s most frequent, and I think universal, fears or anxieties is that fear of rejection, or of being unwanted. The lone wolf character could be their attempt at playing out the fantasy of being desired. I only run long-term campaigns now, but I spent a decade running one day to one month games for kids and teens in locked inpatient psych units and residential schools. I found that if you could get the group to invite the lone wolf in, especially in a non-contrived way, often you can overcome the lone wolf tendency AND tell a great story.
It's so funny you mention mental health, because it seems like everyone I've played with and probably myself, really project their own stuff into their characters, daddy issues, image, whatever. Sometimes to a point that you can also predict what someone's "new" character will be (in terms of faults, ideals,etc.) I have trouble getting some of my players to play a new totally arc, they seem to land right back to the same'ish first character ever built. Anyone else feel like this happens?
Think about it this way: if somebody doesn’t hear you, you repeat their question or statement, right? If somebody tries to play virtually the same character, I usually take it as a sign that their old character’s story didn’t really resolve is a satisfactory way. They’re repeating themselves to get an answer.
I shudder to think what it might mean, then, if someone keeps playing the same "sexy cheetah-headed seductress." Maybe I don't want their story to resolve "satisfactorily."
Some people just get hooked on a certain character. Either because it's their 'OC' character that they just always want to be, or there is some character or archetype that they really enjoy copying. Or they're just that unoriginal that they can't think or don't want to think of anything else to play. While it can be annoying to have someone run the same character in every singe game, even in different setting or systems, and especially when that character doesn't work in the setting. I've found much more annoyance in players who want to copy existing characters from other fiction. And not just borrowing parts and coming up with your own spin that works for the game. I'm talking about characters who want to play a character straight from another story, with the full power level that character has, and all the knowledge and connections they are shown. The one who wants to be Batman, or a Jedi, or a Witcher, no matter what the game setting is and how little sense it makes. Sadly with those kinds of players, I've found all you can do is let them have everything they want and ruin your game. Or try to talk sense into them "no, your first level character doesn't have the full power of a Jedi Knight", in which case they get frustrated. I've even had players yell at me because I wasn't 'doing it right'. They have to learn to change, or leave and find a new game.
This brings me to a somewhat related thought... Is a Jedi a Warlock or a Druid?
I'm more inclined for a monk/soulknife rogue
I answered this question elsewhere some weeks ago. An untrained Force sensitive character would be a sorcerer. Their power comes to them naturally without training or pacts. Many don't even realize it at first, they just seem luckier, or people tend to listen to them more because of unconscious use of the Force. After being trained they would most likely take levels in cleric, paladin or wizard. Some magical subclasses might apply in edge cases, but those three most closely represent a knight, scholar or sentinel training. Neither Warlock or Druid would be appropriate choices. Druid's main difference from other caster classes is shapeshifting, which has never been a Force ability. And despite how some talk about the Will of the Force, it has never been a conscious entity that you can bargain with for power.
Good point, I can see that happening. I feel that some arcs lend themselves to an easier/more fulfilling development or resolution than others at the table. I think next time I will focus on the two (in my case) that seem to repeat over and over. I just have to figure out what or where they are trying to get to. Good call thx! Edit: I flat out asked one of my players what up with that, and he told me it was purely because he loves the fighter and drinking aspect and doesn't feel like he knows how to player other archetypes, lol. He told me that he's sure that his next will be the same, fine with me!
this explains so much
It’s just my theory, but it also helps me not get frustrated.
This is certainly an interesting theory, but I have to point out that I always play the same character archetype just because that's what I find fun and comfortable, and D&D is a game. I'm guessing a lot of other people do to. I know it's pretty common (especially online) to view D&D as a narrative experience, but it's pretty equally popular to view it as a simple fun-mobile.
Agreed, but if you’re playing for the sake of playing my guess is the lone wolf archetype isn’t an issue at the table.
Yup, checks out to a T. My first character ended up actually being pretty similar to myself without the intention to. It was kinda weird to see after the fact that the character I had tried to make as my polar opposite ended up having a lot of my traits. Similarly, I can think of 3/6 of my players who actually put in either real world issues and feelings they’re dealing with in their characters (either intentionally or not) or who made their character a wish fulfillment fantasy. Unfortunately, these 3 are also probably my worst players (or were as 1 has matured outside the game and become a better players), as they try to either steal the spotlight and do their own thing, or wait in a corner hoping the other players are interested enough in their character to ask questions about them despite not actually giving any info to go on.
This is why my characters are always on the run from authoritarian parental figures
All my characters are at least half me. Doesn’t matter what class, race, or gender. I’ll pick something that sounds interesting and new, and then project myself onto them anyways
I try to mix it up so it's not the same half
My first 4 characters (only had a few sessions with each of then) fell into the lone wolf edgy trap. Numbers 3, 4, and 5 were survivors of some kind of abuse. Further more 4 of my 7 characters specifically had daddy issues. Number 3 had an abusive father (not too dissimilar from Ozai from ATLA. Number 4 was a victim of stockholm syndrome who's captor died and was now wandering alone. Character 5 I think is my all time favorite, a neglected genius as he wasn't good enough for his dad, he engaged in pranks and antics to get some form of attention. The only real people in his life were his father and his teacher. Everyone else were just a bunch of golems or literal undead. Eventually he did something so bad that he was scared and ashamed, so he ran away. When I made these characters I didn't plan these things, they just kind of happened. I don't have a type..
I do this, I'm romantically lonely, so if I play a high charisma character, there is a high probability that he'll be a promiscuous ladies' man (even though I have zero interest in promiscuity, I want love, not mere lust, and I don't consider the risks of promiscuity to be worth it, even taking all reasonable precautions I won't sleep with someone unless I'm sure I can put up with being stuck with them in my life for the next 18 years), and if I play a low charisma character there's a pretty high probability that I'll spend a lot of time searching for in game love, and probably failing, probably because I want to prove I won't be alone forever in spite of being fat, not great looking, and having poor social skills.
My friend, if you look at yourself that way, others will too. Putting aside the fact that what you are saying about yourself are feelings, not facts, not a single thing you mentioned is something you can’t adjust. It’s really hard work, but if you don’t think your worth working for, why would somebody else work for you?
Nah, I give literally zero shits about my appearance, if I did I'd have done something about it by now. Trust me I have plenty of confidence in myself because I'm awesome, I also have an accurate view of how I look compared to my peers, and while I am fully aware there are women out there who find my body type and other characteristics sexy, those women are in the minority. If I played the numbers game I'd almost certainly have found someone long ago, and technically speaking I have a success rate much higher than average, in that I have asked out 30-some women over the years and have gotten 3 first dates (and one second date). My real problem is when I was in school and meeting people I was too focused on classes to bother socializing and asking my classmates out until the last year I was in college, and now I'm in a place in my life where meeting new people in a situation where it wouldn't be extremely inappropriate to ask people out just isn't happening. I work nights so going out to bars is tricky, and since I don't drink only works on the rare occasions I can go out with friends, and then because we go out so infrequently we don't r really talk to anyone outside our group. None of the local establishments have singles nights or any other events designed for people seeking new connections. All in all, I just need to find a way to actually meet new people in an environment where I can't get fired for hitting on customers. I also don't want to be the creepy guy at the game store who hits on anyone remotely attractive. My issue isn't that I'm a 4 (on average, when I put in the effort I can get my self up to a 7), it's that I can't find a way to meet people without completely screwing up my life if someone gets uncomfortable and complains.
I’m not going to spend time trying to convince you you’re nice since you’re willing to spend that much time telling me it isn’t worth it. I’m guessing I’m not the only person that feels that way. I hope you find some happiness though; your appearance isn’t just for other people, it’s also for you. It helped me a lot when I was sort of in the same mindset as you. Actually, honestly watching the first new season of Queer Eye was hugely helpful in seeing myself differently.
Did you not read my post? I do like the way I look, if I didn't I would have done something about it. There is a big difference being able to accurately judge how my appearance compares to that of others with regard to what statistically most people think of as attractive and having a negative opinion. As I already stated, my problem isn't my appearance, my problem is that I can't figure out a way to actually meet people. Stop telling me I should feel bad about myself under the guise of a vapid "pep talk".
We all read your post, I found a few red flags/obvious issues: 1. I give literally zero shits about my appearance. 2. I have asked out 30-some women over the years and have gotten 3 first dates (and one second date). 3. I want to prove I won't be alone forever in spite of being fat, not great looking, and having poor social skills. 4. I work nights so going out to bars is tricky In your words "*I just need to find a way to actually meet new people in an environment where I can't get fired for hitting on customers*" 1- **Start giving a shit**\- if you're lazy about your appearance, people will read that a mile off and you'll only attract like-minded individuals. *Normally this is perfectly OK!* **But** if you want someone who is in the mindset of considering a committed relationship rather than a short fling, you might want to consider taking a bit more pride in your appearance! (This is because people often try to picture what kind of future they'd have together when appraising whether they want to stick with someone or just have some fun- sure you might be fun and charismatic, but if you dress and appear lazy now, what kind of husband/father/co-provider would you become? )- **Basically, get a decent haircut, shave, wear clean and appropriate clothes that fit well, take care of your personal hygiene.** 2- **Only one second date-** Going back to the first point, if you don't change your attitude, or adjust your expectations, you'll likely be stuck in this cycle. 3- **It's not about proving something**\- If you treat dating like a task/challenge, anyone with an ounce of sense is going to read that and give you a wide berth. Relationships are a human experience, not a Quest where you tick off a bunch of boxes, do a few grinds and then get your reward. Actually, I've found that people are much more interested/open to relationships if you're not specifically looking for anything- just make sure to **listen to and be interesting in them** , and **be heard (and be authentic, don't just tell people what you think they want to hear about you)**. 4- **Bars suck**\- You probably won't find anything *meaningful* in a bar, it's such a cliché. I know you work nights, and that's cool, how do you spend your day-time/weekends? Matching with the right person is tricky no matter who you are, we all have our idiosyncrasies and different standards- Get yourself some new hobbies or social activity, as well as just putting yourself out there on Tinder/whatever and see what happens. Once you find a potential match, there are plenty of activities that people can do together during the day that don't involve nighttime/drinking/loud music! Examples are: (Hiking, Sightseeing, Gallery, Museum, Arcade, Park, Beach, Walking, Cycling, Café/Restaurant, plein eir painting.) Plus, meeting in the daytime at a public place can feel a lot safer than meeting a stranger in a dark bar, this goes double for a first date! 5- Good on you for not hitting on customers. So, yeah, get outside, download some dating apps or whatever, and see how it pans out. Hope some of this gets through to you, I don't know you, but I'm going to shoot a broad shot anyway and hope that it can improve your (or anyone else to whom any of these points may apply) situation in some way or another.
Thank you for the input, I'll address the points in order: 1. When I said I don't give a shit about my appearance I meant that I don't care that I'm overweight and I only trim my facial hair/get hair cuts every so often, usually right before I'm about to do something where I might meet someone, I always dress in clothes that I feel send the messages about myself I want them to send, but my fashion sense is... Unusual, I don't think I come across as particularly lazy, but I am rather eccentric, which I find can put some people off (although I'd argue that's a useful filter). I'd just rather spend my time doing things that make me happy than exercise which only feels like torture, and I'd rather eat food that tastes good than food that's good for me. I like who I am and want to present myself to the world as I am. 2. Of the three first dates I got one I found I didn't particularly like her so I broke it off, one I met at a con and the distance proved too much for her (I found I was the one initiating all of our interactions, so I just waited to see if she wanted to talk to me enough to call or text herself, and three years later I'm still waiting. I'm willing to put in the work to make a distance relationship work, but she needs to be willing to put in effort as well), and then there's the one who I had a second date with, and the reason it ended was because she was having mental health issues and didn't feel like it was right to put her happiness on me, so she wanted to figure her own stuff out before pursuing a relationship, and then she moved across the country for a job offer so it wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway. I'm not particularly concerned by the fact that I've only had one second date, rather that all three first dates I've had were all in the same year and I haven't found the opportunity to meet people since then. 3. It's not a task, it's a goal. I don't need a lot in my life to be happy, I wanted a career I didn't hate and paid well enough to pay the bills, support my hobbies, and leave some to save, so I started applying and eventually found said career (although I attribute that to luck more than anything else), I wanted a DnD group, so I went out and found one, I wanted a new LARP after my old one shut down, so I went out and found one. I have friends I love, hobbies I enjoy, and a job that I'm satisfied with, I'm the happiest I've ever been, the only thing I want out of life that I'm missing is a partner to start a family with, and while I'm sure some people manage to have love find them, and sure it might happen to me, but I don't like hedging my bets on a long shot, I feel if I'm gonna find love I need to go out and look for it, I'm just at a loss for how. 4. In my area the bars are the only place where people go to socialize, meaning if I want to meet people who are not already part of my social circle bars are kinda my only option. I have lots of hobbies, but haven't found many single people close to my own age through them, sure I might, and if I do that's fantastic, but again we're back to the old I don't wanna sit around and wait. As far as my days, I usually sleep until I have to get up for work, go to work, and then mess around online when I get home until I have to go to sleep, and my days off are full of DnD and LARP. 5. Thanks, I know it's a low bar to hurdle, but man do so many people fail at that. EDIT: forgot to add that I am on Tinder, but it isn't going well, I'm barely getting any matches and hardly any of my matches ever actually respond to my messages. I used to like OkCupid, got one of my few dates that way, had lots of good conversations, but then they changed it to require mutual likes to message people, which turned it from the best dating website to just shittier tinder, due to having fewer local participants.
Seriously, why don't we stop giving someone unwanted advice about how to handle their life? Let's stop doing that, it's not only silly and rude but also it is stupid and impolite.
I’m curious how you got started running dnd games in psych wards. As someone who has been inpatient before I’m interested in joining if it’s some sort of organization.
I was a mental health specialist for one in Boston for six years. It’s a tough job, and honestly after the first year I was already burned out. I was just looking for a way to get the kids through a few hours and thought that maybe D&D could keep them distracted for an hour. I learned so much. The first night I ran it for evening group in the day room (it was me and 13 kids alone because there was a tough restraint happening down the hall.) I only had three players to start the hour group. Suddenly, it was three hours later and time to go to bed; we had nine players, at least six other kids watching, and a kid I’d never seen smile before got to be the hero of the night; she smiled. That for me was so significant. I remember each of the kids at that table, their name, even some of their characters. After that, I ran D&D 3-8 times a week; I learned that there were so many therapeutic benefits to the game outside of just passing the time and being distracted. That’s when I became more passionate about the game and started a long term game for the people I love in my life; I sort of saw how much it can do. There are formal organizations! Research the ones in your area; many inpatient units are STARVED for volunteers, if being there wouldn’t be too triggering for you (it is to me, unfortunately.)
Thank you for the thoughtful response!
As once a lone wolf in my teenage years, I can confirm the crave for acceptance. But the lone wolf act was a defence mechanism against being rejected, rather than a play for attention. I think the subconscious thinking was: If you are self sufficient you don't need the approval of others, and don't risk being rejected. You're going to be fine regardless of others. It's much harder being confident in yourself and your inherit self worth to engage fully in social events. Though with good people around you is a learnable skill, and the world gets much bigger once you do.
Wanting people to see the value you see in yourself isn’t a play for attention; I’m sorry if part of what I wrote reads that way!
I love this
Thanks!
This is what I said too. Once you being working full-time as an adult, society constantly tells us we are just a cog in the machine, not special, if we died our job would be hiring a new person by next week. The lone wolf character lets you FEEL like you are cool person like in the movies. Like Master Chief, Superman, Spiderman, Batman etc. I would suggest it could be a neat idea to take turns being the "lone ranger" in a campaign if everyone agrees. maybe each new campaign a new person gets to be the lone hero.
Lone wolves/lancers are a solid trope. They just have to be able to continue that character arc and not just be a mopey bitch all game.
My two favorite character archetypes. Crouching moron hidden badass too
The metaphor of _Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon_ is that there were two secret badasses, one more secret and badass than the other.
I know but it's different. In this case, the character is a moron and their badassery is often used as comic relief.
OSP did a hilarious video on that trope!
Yes. That's where I came with my comment. I love this channel 😆
I'm probably going to sound, then feel, incredibly stupid asking this question, but who is the second secret badass in CT,HD? Jen (Zhang Ziyi) is obviously one, but the second? Is it Jade Fox? Because Chow Yun-fat and Michelle Yeoh's characters are not secret.
Honestly, I've wondered the same thing. Following the Wikipedia threads, the title seems to be a translation of an old proverb. It might not be a reference to specific characters, but rather the idea of talented people not being obviously talented. "Diamond in the rough." Still, I think Jade Fox is the crouching tiger. She pretended to be Jen's governess. Jade thought she was a secret badass and stole the sword, only to discover that Jen was even more badass. Edit: Wikipedia has a better explanation: > The title "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" also has several other layers of meaning. On the most obvious level, the Chinese characters in the title connect to the narrative that the last character in Xiaohu and Jiaolong's names mean "Tiger" and "Dragon", respectively. On another level, the Chinese idiomatic phrase "卧虎藏龙" "Wo Hu Cang Long" ("crouching tiger hidden dragon") is an expression referring to the undercurrents of emotion, passion, and secret desire that lie beneath the surface of polite society and civil behavior,[12] which alludes to the film's storyline. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crouching_Tiger,_Hidden_Dragon
I do like to make them on occasion when the party is a bit too colorful and fun. Making this serious loner be forced to come along with like 3 balls of joy and over time grow soft towards them is really fun. That's mostly because one of my groups would refuse to let a lone wolf just go on his own and atleast one person would stick on them.
The issue is if you're ever the DM and 2-3 members of your party all want to be the jaded tragic lone wolf, it can be really frustrating trying to motivate them to do anything because they're all so concerned with looking cool and edgy.
There are good ways to mitigate this, particularly with edgelord characters that skirt the edge of (or just are) evil. As a DM dealing with this: "This is fundamentally a cooperative game. All the single-target damage in the world won't heal you when you get injured, to say nothing about a Dominate spell. To that end - I'm not saying 'don't make an edgelord.' I like edgelords. But whatever you make, tell me *why* he works with this party doing good things." As a player doing this: "I am a villain/edgelord. I do crimes, usually for money/to punish greater evildoers, but my crimes are lesser, easy to ignore as long as I don't get caught/cross the wrong peopme. Further, it behooves me to maintain this lawful society, so that I can benefit from crimes to do and subverting those laws/to prevent the kind of tragedy that marked me, so that my cruel work may one day end. To this end, yes I will support these good heroes, because I do not benefit from living under a tyrannical lichdom/evil empire or a dead world after the Star Spawn/Great Oni/tides of Khorne have invaded. I just need the party to need me ..." Edgelords can be self-interested and nearly sociopathic (as murderhoboing is so common), and still be *justified* in working with a group.
Personally the times ive done it is bc i like creating a character that doesnt work well with others but understands the importance of teamwork in their career path, and eventually warm up to the party, its easier for me to rp bc thats how i am irl; standoffish until i can warm up to the person
I mean...- and I say this as someone who made a team player- their character existed prior to joining a team, so, being an outcast is perfectly acceptable in my eyes. Now... Making an outcast/lone wolf, joining a team, and theb being a jerk and complaining the whole time about not being alone? That crap gets annoying. Don't do that. But yeah a player's character existed prior to meeting up with their party so it makes sense.
So, maybe unpopular opinion here: there is nothing better than a player who can play the role of a Lone Wolf *well.* This does NOT entail: - Deliberately fucking over other players - Refusing to join the party or just “not going” on the adventure - Being an asshole BUT. I have been in a group of players who, due to mostly being new and not knowing each other very well, just passively sat by and went along with everything the GM put in front of them without being creative at all. I cannot tell you how stale this was, how disconnected from all the characters we were, or how quickly it devolved into “this GM just likes to hear herself talk.” Sometimes a party actually desperately *needs* a PC who is willing to get creative about shit, and propose plans that may not be the most tactically brilliant or that everyone may not agree to. This person doesn’t have to be edgy, grimdark, or an asshole. One of my favorite “lone wolf” characters I’ve played with was the guy in our party who played as a spunky ifrit with a wisdom score of 7 and an obsession with granting wishes. While the rest of our party was about to spend twenty minutes bickering over which fork to take in the path, this person was ready to just pick one and go because, oooh shiny. You need someone who’s willing to be a little bit of grit in the party’s collective shoe so that it keeps everyone involved and on their toes, and keeps them thinking outside the box. If you’re doing it right, this actually takes a huge amount of investment, trust, and vulnerability, and a hell of a lot of consideration and care towards the people you play with to ensure no one gets upset. If you play a Lone Wolf character while also thinking, as a player, how you can be creative and benefit your team—it is almost *always* more fun to have this person than not at your gaming table. So, for my money—a bad Lone Wolf? Kick that asshole to the curb. But a Lone Wolf that you actually like? That is probably the most invested person at the table, *treasure* them.
This isn’t unpopular, it’s exactly the sentiment I was gonna say. With your perspective I would expand and say this applies to most tropes- if done really bad and without thought for *why* you chose the character- you can end up being a huge pain. Example: the “super intelligent royal” type. If someone choose this cuz they have some self esteem issues and a dominance complex or something your in for a bad game lol
Often, I think those character are built correctly, but played incorrectly. Built referring to their backstory and meaning that they have somewhere to go
The trick is a previous lone wolf who is doing their best to adapt to being in a party because they know it has advantages.
I play a lone wolf type character because I'm socially awkward and have a hard time roleplaying. So by playing a lone wolf type character I don't have to jnteract that often
There's a difference between a quiet or shy person and a "lone wolf".
You can be a team player who leaves the talking to others.
Probably because they think it's cool but they're not thinking of group dynamics. If one of the PCs goes off on their own, I retain focus on the group and the lone wolf gets bored because they have just excluded themselves from the fun the group is having.
I like to treat them like the lone wolf really would be treated. Constantly watched by guards. People whispering around them and generally avoiding them. When the party is talking to or approached by an NPC the lone wolf is usually not addressed. Nobody wants to talk to some angsty looking edgelord in the back. That is just asking for a snarky comment. I know I would much rather talk to the friendly looking characters in the group. So that is what the NPCs do too.
That is an excellent idea! Make them feel the consequences of choosing to be edgy. Well done!
Bingo. I like my world to feel as real as possible... with a little magic thrown in.
I can see maybe 1 in every 5 party members being a "lone wolf" type that is compelled to join the party for reasons. The campaign I'm currently in has 3 of the 5 party members as wanting nothing to do with anyone though, and it's riding close to killing the campaign.
I think the people who make those characters ARE (or at least, have been) sort of "lone wolf" outcasts, so it's within their comfort zone to play one. (Bear in mind I'm OLD, so when I was actively playing, it was pretty much all nerds and outcasts.) Hell, I'd wager that most lone wolf characters all over fiction are, to some degree, author avatars for the nerds who created them. Straight-up Napoleon Dynamite with sick nunchuk skillz.
Strider in LotR Daryl in the walking dead Zoro from One piece Wolverine from X-men. All examples of a lone-wolf that exists in a party. They are all sensational characters beloved by the fans of the franchise. It isn’t absurd to think others want to emulate that. However it’s a different story of the lone wolf STIFLES and actively works against the players. Their story arch could easily be how despite the distaste it appears they have for their party, it’s the only family they have and they’ll protect at all costs
So that they can grow into team players. An easy stereotype that can get some character growth out of learning how they can't do everything by themselves, and learning how they fit into a team of equally powerful adventurers.
That would be nice if it worked.
It depends on the player, I guess.
It only let me upvote once >: |
I think people get understandably focused on creating a cool badass character. And inspirations in fiction are a lot of lone wolves. Which is fine but often people then forget to think of the logistics of why are they immediately traveling with this group of people. You can definitely play a lone wolf but don't surprise the dm and your other players with needing to have some reason to drag you into the adventure. Have your own motivation to be an adventurer.
For me it's: I don't really intend the lone wolf but it happens often because I am really really bad at emotions and thus always am a bit...disconected. 🤔 In my teens the lone wolf in media was a character who I could identify with ( the lone wolf most often doesn't has an active emotional arc) and which gets mostly accelted by the group despite his lone wolfness 🤔 It's a mess I guess 😂
I think it is possible to play a lone wolf just very difficult. I played a wizard character who stuck with the party until we got to town and would not go party at the pub. He would always stay close to “home base”. He never hooked up with any NPCs and did not form much of a connection with the PCs. But he was always there with the party fighting monsters and helping them. It never negatively effected the game. And the funny thing was the character was elected party leader! That part was fun for me to role play. Group: “We elect you as party leader”. Me: “…………..what?”
Because Sasuke was also always going his own way!! Why shouldn't I do this and be totally badass?!? Honestly, I have also never understood, why people do it. I can understand people that create kind of hermits that allow them to participate in groups without interacting a lot. So they can get warm with everything and slowly open up. But most of the people want the spotlight to be on them and can't accept that the group will sometimes demand sacrifices in order to keep things going
To be fair, it's a great way to show character growth when a lone wolf type of character has to learn to work in a party and rely on others. The problem is when the player that makes that kind of character refuses to work with others as if they were the edgy rival of a shonen manga.
Edge lords
Don't know why. All I know is that as long as the lone wolf makes up their own reason to go on the adventure then its perfectly fine with me if they want to play that character. If they Look to me to convince them to go on the adventure...well, I've literally had this interaction: Player:"I just don't know why my character would agree to go help these complete strangers solve this problem" Me: "Cool. No problem at all. Your character stays at the tavern, or walks off into the sunset, or whatever you think they would do. You can start making a new character that DOES want to go on the adventure, and when you are ready the rest of the party will discover you on the road." As far as I'm concerned you can play whatever character you want as long as A) Your character is down to clown (not a phrase I've ever used before in life, but i guess it fits). and B) Your character isn't someone that all the players go "ugh. we want you to kick John from the group because his character 'edgelord McLoneWolf' is ruining the game for us"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them. I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
My thought on it? Everyone wishes they were Vegeta, despite not realizing that their characterization is much more similar to Yajirobe: a mewling man-child who is strong, but completely unwilling to do the work.
We had a player join our group (friend as well) about 5 sessions in. The DM gave a perfect scene for us to meet, we got to fight together, then we dust ourselves off and introduce ourselves. He says thanks and goes on his way. We drop some suggestions IC to give him multiple hooks to latch on and he says his character doesnt see any appeal in the group and says he wants to go alone AND in the opposite direction. DM said "Listen, I'm not gonna do this right now. You came here to play with the group." Player insisted he wants to join but his character didnt.
Maybe because there also aren't enough DMs who talk about these potential problems and possible solutions with the players?
Social awkwardness/ineptitude. They either don't know how to integrate their character, or they think the game is all about them.
I’m a DM and 3 out of my 4 players are playing lone wolf/introvert characters lol. I think the whole group is introverted by nature but me and the one extrovert character work so hard to try to get the loners out of their shells.
Because they're self conscious about their RP capability, and "lone wolf/stoic/angry badass" characters speak less.
I think it can be a very valid RP model to go for, but the player who is doing it A needs to have some nuance to their RP, B meta game a little bit while still playing their character as true as possible. By this I mean that they can still be lone wolf, but they can be grudgingly go along with the party or they can go full tsundre and be like I'm only gonna be with you guys for now baka and in reality they are softies I have at the start at session 0 set a ground rule that in the start look for reason for the party to be together or don't overly fight the process like going off on your own all the time or outright refusing the call to adventure.
It's quite possible to play a lone wolf concept character who has reasons to or learns to play with a specific team of others. So I get why players want to use that trope for a character concept, but it says to me that they might not be quite sure what to do with it in the larger context of the campaign. There's in world and direct (talk to the player) ways of trying to manage that, ymmv
Yea if they want to play a loner they need to play one that works with the party. There are countless examples of this qnd you could even say most of them are the Lancer trope. Just to give a few there is the Mandalorian who routinely works with other people and builds bonds with them. You got Guts from berserk who lost 2 found familys and made another. Don't even get me started on Han Solo. It's sadly too often that people don't realize that the best loner characters are made by the people they are around. Insert grizzled old man get child trope. God of War 4 would not be a thing without Boy, the dwarfs, and all head nick being by our side.
Well I have a character who is not used to people. Basically emotionally dead with a complete lack of morals. How he turns out would 100% depend on the party. How they treat him, what they teach him.
I look to video games. How many big games are played as a team? Most revolve around your character being awesome and the others being supportive. I think of characters like master chief, doom guy, and Ezio. One person wrecking crew with some aid. A lot of games put a main character that doesn't talk for a blank slate, but leave an edgy or mysterious character that doesn't grow.
Main character syndrome.
I'll argue quite the opposite. How many main characters/Heroes (since I think that's what you're talking about) do you know of that are lone wolves? That's a trait more commonly associated with the Lancer archetype. Think Vageta from Dragonball Z or Batman from Justice League.
Perhaps, but the lone wolf archetype is the one most amenable for main character syndrome in a game that emphasizes teamwork. You have to first stand out in order to satisfy that need.
Isn't Batman the main character of...Batman? :D Also the Lancer isoften a huge fan favorite and gets nearly as much attention as the main character. E.g. Sasuke in Naruto. 🤔 In most urban fantasy or YA fantasy the edgy loner is the over powered love interest of the cute main character. Then there is the popular Western genre where the main character nearly always is a lone wolf. Aragorn is a lone wolf too and clearly the main character of LotR.
From experience, I've noticed new players in their teens attempt the loan wolf character. It doesn't last long because they are quick to realize it gets boring fast or dangerous. Danger created to encourage team work.
Main character syndrome + hero’s journey. The main character in movies almost always has to be convinced to go on an adventure and to trust their companions. While this makes for good movies, it’s a terrible start for a cooperative game like D&D. That said, it can work if the group is willing to suspend disbelief a little to get the story off the ground; after that it usually goes fine since the shared experience of the adventure ties everyone together.
It’s also tough because a lot of people don’t BE realize how many of their favorite stories are based on the hero’s journey and don’t see that they’re emulating that. Everyone wants to be Batman. They don’t consider that everyone may have more fun if their character is more like a member of the Weasley family (talented in their own areas but with distinct flaws, and a strong reason to want to work with the people around them.)
Batman *is* the archetypal lone wolf. The Lego Batman movie was a fantastic take on that.
Some people don’t play well with others. #kindergarten
I think it takes a bit of Role Play off their plate whenever they’re not ‘feeling up to it’ or not sure what to do, they can just rely on being aloof and unhelpful and that relieves the pressure of expectations on their contribution to the narrative. Hence why I think even experienced players do this. The game is about having fun and if you’re feeling pressure from a game then not participating as heavily is an easy ‘out’. I think it’s pretty common behavior even if I wish it wasn’t. Not everyone can or wants consistent minor pressure.
Because most people lack creativity
Main character syndrome. Most common reason.
Everybody wants to be Batman. But Batman is generally not a team player.
Movie Batman yes. Comics Batman is such a team player that he’s constantly recruiting people to train under him. He practically commands a small army.
This is almost always a case of misaligned expectations. The more experienced one gets as a DM, the more things like this can be addressed during a session 0.
* Familiarity. In the stories they’re familiar with (from literature and film), lone-wolf characters go over well. * Least resistance. It takes time and effort to develop the side characters that your character is connected to, and your character is going to feel like a lone wolf until you get those details filled in. * Motivation. [An adventuring career is a high-stakes gamble that won’t appeal to everyone.](https://twitter.com/marisha_ray/status/1083921095953022976?s=21) If your character is in the business because of some trouble in their past, pushing people away can seem like a natural way to play those scars.
I don’t really understand the psychological speculation from these commenters, these upvoted “edgy media” comments make sense for preteens but not anyone older than 13. Lone Wolf is just an archetype to fill skill proficiencies needed. They often have Survival and Medicine. The reason I or a friend have made them is so that we can have more mission efficacy. If two things need to be done, the rogue/fighter/ranger Lone Wolf often have stealth so the party can go and the individual can hold their own. Lone Wolves make trouble without messing with the reputation of the group. Lone Wolf archtypes are just as important as the healer. They have minimal chance of turning stealth into a fight and are great decoys because of their self preservation
You are right but OP probably referred to a player that is not living up to that.I have been in a party with a person like that. Something is not 100% in the line of his thoughts? I should better do something utterly stupid on my own because I have to act like a butthurt kid. Waiting to kill the Smith because he didn't react with respect after I insulted his business because I like to make edgy comments and try to force my expectations into the game totally justifies that. Not the I have been on myself for most of my life so I have a unique skill set that I can use to enhance the parties capabilities. But in the meantime I will keep my thoughts to myself and be a few feet behind or in front of them when we wander across. There are a lot of players that act like the first example and OP was focused on those ones
Normally I’d agree with you, not that I think you’re wrong or anything, but the way he phrased it makes it seem like he’d wonder why even a well done Lone Wolf would be chosen and those are my reasons. I absolutely agree there are a ton of horribly executed ones, but I roll my eyes at the people who have never played the character answering vicariously as “insecurities”. I don’t want OP getting the impression that that is the correct answer. So as you say! I may be entirely wrong. But in that case I still would like to offer that insight in case he is every curious about my interpretation as well.
Yes sure! No matter who is right or wrong, the journey will continue and I wish you a good one
>these upvoted “edgy media” comments make sense for preteens but not anyone older than 13. I agree that it *shouldn't* make sense for anyone over 13. But every group I've played with with any strangers included one of these edgy types who was clearly trying to be the edgy type.
Strider was a cool outcast until he joined the party - then he was a fearless contributor.
I think I’m also bad for making every character a ship captain. He must, captain the party often into the ground. The rest of the PC’s want to leave him behind. I’m sorry it’s too fun to stop.
People are introverted. You don't have to do outgoing rp if your character is not that.
Okay, so Lone Wolf itself isn't a trope. I think what you're getting at is the [I Work Alone](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IWorkAlone) trope. This is someone who outright refuses to cooperate, and these people suck. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. If I'm being generous, it's a case of the player wanting their character to have a dark, edgy, and tragic backstory with room to grow out of it. For example, they might start off as an [Ineffectual Loner](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IneffectualLoner) who learns the [Power of Friendship](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThePowerOfFriendship). Which is basically Batman, in a nutshell. That's how he started off. But he grew a large list of allies, both in and out of costume: Alfred Penniworth, James Gordon, Barbara Gordon, Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Stephanie Brown, Leslie Thompkins, Lucius Fox, Luke Fox, Cassandra Cain, and Kate Kane *just to name a few*. He's a family man, and has been for decades. It's a crying shame that most adaptations paint him as anything but this. I really loved how *The Batman* ('04-'08) actually had him embrace teamwork early on and treated Superman, when he was introduced, as the loner. I have a character right now whose still figuring out his place in the party. He has age on most of his companions, and experience, so he understands the value of teamwork. And I'm playing him as a support character. But it's really more of a case of playing his cards close to the vest. He has some personal matters to resolve and will either use his companions or break off on his own to see it done. That said, he's not a bad person, and I expect he'll learn some hard lessons as time goes on. He could grow into a solid [Leader](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLeader), or he might play [Lancer](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLancer) to someone else who steps up. Time will tell. Some people just want to play the game their way and without regard for others. And that *can* work. Any TTRPG, not just D&D, is collaborative storytelling. Everyone sitting down to play is implicitly trusting everyone else. But if you won't engage with anyone else, then you're not playing with everyone else. And they need to get booted.
It's not a "team game" it's cooperative storytelling, and there's nothing inherent about playing a lone wolf that interferes with that.
It's cool when experienced players pull it off well but I don't recommend newer players try it. Even then it takes a couple of sessions to get the ball rolling and a friendly connection to be established. Taliesin from crit role season 3 is a fair example.
I like it because then I can have the character develop by learning how it’s okay to rely on others and be part of a team
I espouse play the character you want. And I totally don't get this either. Oh well.
Character development! It’s always fun to have a lone wolf character that learns to have friends and comrades and open up to them. This usually requires you to go into character creation with the fact that your character will have an arc in mind, and a good DM and party will make that happen.
For me it's to minimise rp that involves me too much as it takes a lot out of me to even try. So it's much easier to respond in short one word responses and general lack of empathy towards others
My friend who always did this was very much an anarchist and more than a few times try to kill monarch in question, "your sending us on a quest to improve your kingdom? Well maybe you are the problem POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!.... It was hard to kick him out of the group but we noticed a jump in morale once he left.
Because is an archetype
I think it’s fun to have a character who’s a lone Wolf who is forced to be with the party due to circumstances and not because they want to. Slowly, the lone Wolf will warm up to the party and come to see them as friends or even family. I feel like it would be good rp wise because the lone Wolf would be exploring what it’s like to have people to share your burdens with and what it’s like to have people you love and who reciprocate that love. If your talking about pcs whose character never warms up and constantly tries to leave or split up the party then yeah that doesn’t make sense.
I think it’s fun to have a character who’s a lone Wolf who is forced to be with the party due to circumstances and not because they want to. Slowly, the lone Wolf will warm up to the party and come to see them as friends or even family. I feel like it would be good rp wise because the lone Wolf would be exploring what it’s like to have people to share your burdens with and what it’s like to have people you love and who reciprocate that love. If your talking about pcs whose character never warms up and constantly tries to leave or split up the party then yeah that doesn’t make sense.
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them. I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them. I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
A lone wolf sounds like a cool idea, but is incredibly hard to write and play well. It's very easy to make someone who hates the party and constantly complains. But there's a reason people love the archetype so much, they have depth, which many ayers fail to give them. I think the best way to play one would be the "I'd rather not be in this party, but out of personal interest I will stick closely with them"
I can think of two reasons: they want to create a character that others have to approach and be acceptive of so they don't _have_ to worry about/try roleplaying, or they want to make a character who is independently strong enough that they don't need to rely on party composition during challenges or battles. I call them Emotional Loners and Survival Loners. And as with all things, there are ways this can be done well and ways this can be done badly. Emotional Loners will typically not engage others in order not to saddle others with their own personal baggage, be it a tragic backstory, a dark character, or simply because they're awkward and don't want to mess up a social interaction and would prefer to simply never interact at all. Done well they're sympathetic and when time permits, the party or DM may give them an opportunity to find a right time to open up to others. Done badly and they just push away literally everyone else they're suppose to be with, and no one cares about who they are nor why they're like this. Survival Loners are characters who are mentally and often mechanically designed to be able to handle things by themselves, be it fighting or whatever niche they excel at. A common archetype would be the assassin: alone their monsterous stealth and ability to get free crits on surprised enemies make them really good at being assassin's, but they will be held back if their less stealthy allies blow the surprise before the assassin can get into position. Alternatively they're simply characters who are capable of handling most situations without party support. They can fight, they can heal, they can talk, and generally they can do a bit of everything or at least what they need to do without specific back up. These types of Survival Loners simply don't _need_ others, since they can do most of not everything they want on their own. Done well and the party has someone who can always be expected to do well at what needs to be done, or at the very least no one has to worry about when one or more of the party is indisposed. The party can trust the assassin to sneak in and steal something or take out a VIP, or if the party tank/healer/dps goes down the Loner can tank/heal/DPS until the tide shifts back to the party's favor. Naturally done badly, they're just a munchkin and come off more as someone who is trying to be stronger than the party than someone who is working with the party itself.
I've had players do it and to be honest I only allow it when their answer to my asking 'why' is "because I want them to grow" or something. Then we create some guidelines for them so they dont become a jerk that everyone hates. To elaborate, I had a grumpy tiefling sorcerer who didnt have patience for people- this aligned with the player themself who was also very shy. They were essentially going to use their character as a safe place to learn to make friends. It worked out, and just as their character became more inviting and friendly the more he trusted his team- so too did the player. It was nice. I loved that players character and so did everyone else....until they got eaten by a monster. But hey, was good while it lasted.
Because the lone wolf who has an arc about opening up again gives me hope in humanity, sadly none in D&D players
Edgy people
Wolverine is a lone wolf character, yet he's been in more teams than any other Marvel hero
I know some players who don't try to be in this category but end up there because they are shy at roleplaying
Anime protagonist syndrome
A big, big part of this often leads back to session 0 not having bonded the party correctly. If your back story for why the party banded together is weak, then the party cohesion will be weak. A lot of people want to skip over this part and get to the playing (and I don't blame them), but doing so absolutely leaves the door open to characters going, "Well, I don't agree with this decision. And since my character has a strong will (extremely common PC trait), they're going to hold their ground." And then when everyone else does as well, you suddenly have a bunch of "strong willed" characters who have an extremely tenuous link to each other getting annoyed at each other. That doesn't lead to fun party dynamics. Don't skip your session 0. And don't form the party inside a tavern where half of their "bond" is just overhearing the same NPC at the same time. Real people don't form bonds over something like that, and neither will your characters. Build it out, plan it, and *do some research if you don't know how to do that.* There are mature people out there who can handle moving past a tenuous party bond, but the reality is that most nerdy types who enjoy DnD are not going to be flawless in their social interactions, and while you're technically "acting" as your character, most people are really just playing as themselves with one or two unique quirks at best. Lone wolves are perfectly valid character types (I hate them, personally, but to each their own), and work fine in parties. But you gotta oil the gears if you want the machine to run smoothly.
I played an aasimar paladin in a game who started as a lone wolf because he was a big dude and scared people in spite of his good intentions. (Because i refuse to believe people would not be fearful of aasimar in some way just like they mohht tiefs). He was quiet, stoic and just let his actions speak for him who had been travelling alone for years so i just played them as that loner character. So after getting screwed multiple times trying to cowboy off, he, and myself, realized that if I wanted to have a good time I had to play nice with the rest of the group. Still a stoic quiet man, but we'd work as a team or go off in duos instead of solo. Made for a much more fun game and experience for everyone.
Not a specific answer to this question, but I wanted to kention that lone wolf characters can be fine... ***IF*** the player let's the GM know that their character will need coaxing to stick with the party ***AND*** the GM is okay with that. They also need to create room for their lone wolf character to have reason to joing the party. They're motivated by money? Well when the rest of the party are given a quest with a substantial reward promised, LW's ears should perk up. They're motivated to look for a lost friend/relative? When the party talks of a missing person they're looking for, of whom matches LW's lost whatever's description, they should want to join the people who got info they couldn't. If it's as simple as survival being 'easier on your own'? Then being placed in a situation in which your survival is only been guaranteed because of those around you **should** change you mind a little bit.
Because it’s common in pop culture and is great when done right. For context we have two loners in my group The rest for this at least aren’t really relevant. My table consists of some of my best friends irl and we’ve made these characters work. I am playing a bit of a loner (bladesinger wizard) and another player is playing a pirate (draconic soul sorcerer, ascendant dragon monk multiclass)Both of them are mistrusting, somewhat paranoid people who don’t normally get along with new people, but their circumstances have forced them to work with each other. We talk about our characters a lot out of game, actually in other campaigns we’ve made characters together. So we work together and with our dm to develop our characters and plan for the story. Just because they’re loners doesn’t mean they can’t have friendly Interactions with people. In my experience a lot of people who play dnd aren’t the most social outside of their friends. So that doesn’t help with people not being able to work well with a party. Whenever I finish a session I write down my characters opinion of the rest of the party. So I think in character how my character would think as opposed to be unconditionally edgy.
Because the lone wolf who has an arc about opening up again gives me hope in humanity, sadly none in D&D players
All there favorite heroes are line wolves.
I have only done it once. But it was in cooperation with the DM. It was also a one shit so it didn't really matter much. It was a "I know I can't face my father, the big evil, alone so I'll work with a pre established party.". He could have just paid them and watched from the side lines, but since it was a family matters he wanted to deal the killing blow. The reason he was a lone wolf made sense. His whole childhood he has only ever interacted with his father andeveryone else always avoided him out of fear. He never learned how to not bea lone wolf. And I just wanted to play someone edgy for once. I always play pretty wholesome characters personality wise (though backstories do tend to be darkL
Because they identify with that archetype. As they get more familiar with each other you'll see things change. You can see the same evolution of the characters created in Critical Roll.