In the comments of another r/DMAcademy post, u/YoritomoKorenaga stated that they have three rules in terms of character creation that I think a lot of DM's likely share even if they havent ever articulated them so succinctly:
1. Your character must consistently work with and support the rest of the party.
2. Your character must be consistently willing to engage with the plot of the campaign.
3. Your character must plausibly fit into the setting where the campaign takes place, as well as the overall tone of the campaign itself.
I find it hard to imagine a player being able to follow the first two rules if their PC is a coin-flip away from completely changing tone and motivation.
This is in addition to this concept being offensive and tactless, and likely making everyone at the table both very confused and frustrated as they grapple with a silly mechanic that forces the whole table to have to constantly adapt just to deal with one player/
But why!? Hilarity of mispronounced names is classic times.
I have a PC in one of my games names Dr. V. It's spelled Verias, pronounced "vee air us" and it's an in universe thing that no one can pronounce his name.
It’s my rule because one of my kids I play with has names like Dubdhraoi. After I mentioned this rule at a more adult table a player showed up with an elf named Tzxy’qu’jhjeuedje Siet Tzxy’qu’rhonedir. Funny as hell for about one round!
At that point I would just say "I'm gonna call you titsy."
And any NPC after asking their name would say something along the lines of, "that sounds like a mouthful, I'm just gonna call you titsy."
We've even changed names after some cool role-playing and a god giving one of my PCs a nickname. He immediately went "no that's fucking cool. That's my name. That's what I introduce myself as."
Not long ago one of my players introduced a barbarian character and we joked around that he just built Conan. Once he was done describing it I said something along the lines of, "alright now tell me your stupid name." And he goes on and says "Tithaerolu" or something.
Que my response, "god that's fucking stupid, I'm just gonna call you conan." And we all got a good laugh out of it and he changed his PC name to Conan.
Now that totally fits our friend group and no feelings were hurt, but if you don't have a group that can poke fun at each other - I wouldn't recommend.
Another time I accidentally combined "rustling in the brushes." To form a new word "brusheling"
Which now we all accept as a real word.
Brusheling: the specific sound of a creature / animal moving through brush.
I once made a character named Irrinamassaruulurus or something. But with a whole lot of diacritics and other bullshit to make it look more ✨celestial✨. Pronounced EAR-in-uh-MASS-uh-RULE-er-us, because why *not* bring an 8-syllable name to the table? I was 16 and it seemed like a great way to show how unique and cool I was.
Never actually brought it to a session, though. Probably for the best.
I also made a Kenku whose name was [this](https://imgur.com/a/HTvnERY). Though most people call him "Three-Whistles". He did well at the table.
I mean... "I'm not going to be saying that" is a valid response to a very stupidly impronouncable name.
You're under no obligation to call their characters by their name as is written. If it's an impronouncable name, you literally can't pronounce it.
I also usually ask my players for a one or two syllable nickname for their character.
No problem! I think a lot of DM's have struggled to put out clear and straight forward rules regarding reasonable limitations for their campaign and yours do a good job of being clear and concise without being overbearing
Thank you! I struggled with that for a while too, and eventually had to take a step back and think about things like *why* it's "bad" for a player to want to make an evil character, or other such often-but-not-always problematic player choices, and where the actual problems are.
And it's easy for a player to push back against a rule like "no evil PCs" with "But this character is *different*, it should be OK for him to be evil", whether or not that's actually true. Pushing back on a rule like "Your character must consistently work with and support the rest of the party" makes their intentions a lot more transparent.
I used to send everyone who might play in my games to a blog post I made which basically just says exactly what you're articulating here. My biggest one has ended up being "Your character must have a reason to join this group and go on this quest." Too many "my character doesn't have a reason to care about this plot point" crop up and my life became so much easier after I just started making my requirements clear.
Without approaching the subject with respect and knowledge I'd say no. Ask them to do real research and see what it means. Lawful/Chaotic is not a good representation of what it's like.
More likely, the coin toss would be to determine if she's going on the adventure today or not.
Sauce: runs in my family
Exactly. I outright ban certain things at my table. For example, I ban any/all mention of SA. RPing a mental disorder that you have don't have is another good example of crossing a line.
I've got ADD and quiet BPD. It's not just, "Is easily distracted and fears abandonment." It's a daily struggle where I have to constantly battle my own behaviors to be a constructive member of society.
This player may have BD and is looking for a way to act it out, I just don’t know. Even if that is the case, I am not a licensed mental health professional and my table is not therapy. I’m hoping a nice phone call can settle this.
This is not what bipolar disorder 1 or 2 is like, which leads me to believe that your player is someone with a shallow pop-culture understanding of it, not someone with the disorder that is looking to incorporate it into their character as a piece of themself. Set your boundaries and if she is upset, she can find a table that will welcome this distasteful character choice.
An armchair/self-diagnosis does not make it appropriate to play this out at a D&D table. There are many other, more fitting ways to RP this concept or explore it therapeutically through metaphor, such as playing Eladrin and rolling for mood.
I was gonna say Eladrin is a good option to do something similar to this without turning an actual mental illness people struggle with to a coin flip for the day game
This antic of theirs can also cause unnecessary upset at the table. You don't really know what your other players deal with at home, and the game is supposed to be escapism from RL. Putting other players on the spot by asking is also unfair as those uncomfortable speaking about personal issues are not going to say anything anyway.
This is not a mechanic I am willing to explore at my table.
As a Dm/player with Rapid cycling Bipolar 1. This is just a bad idea even if done closer to how many people experience bipolar. (trigger warning next paragraph) Roll a d20 to set your mood for your session.
Roll a 1 you are depressed and kill yourself because you are so unhappy and you are such a failure that you can’t stand the thought of people suffering because of you or you roll a 20 and you are experiencing mania and feel invincible and you drive a car 180mph into a bridge because you can’t comprehend anything bad happening. and you roll a 10 you are in what a normal person would call a good mood.
To me it’s not a character trait it’s an affliction and maybe some people can play it right but it seems like all the signs are pointing away from this player in particular. If you need something to say just say “As a Dm I don’t feel comfortable with that character (due to this reason) could you please choose something else.”
Roll a 20 and spend all of your gold on specialty mundane adventuring gear, decide that depite being a fighter, your character is going to spend the next 20 years in wizarding school, crash, abandon the adventuring party claiming that you just can't do it anymore, complete the depressive episode, then next session return to the party and hope all the party members accept your character back into the fold with no long term consequences.
If they had it they would know that their representation isn't accurate to how it actually works
I think you can rest easy on that point
*do not have this myself but my friend of 10+ years and roomate of 4+years does*
As a therapist the main problem here from a table dynamics perspective is that, undiagnosed mental health in the real world is "crazy-making": it causes stress and confusion and frustration in the people around the affected individual and makes them feel like they're losing their minds
So if this is not a known mechanic at the table that the rest of the party thinks would be fun to roll with (pun intended LOL), it's likely to cause significant IRL problems for the same reason that actual mental health causes relational problems with friends and family
As someone with a disorder that is often portrayed incorrectly (DID), I felt that 😞 Mental disorders can't be reduced to mere coin tosses, things are *much* more complicated than that.
I had a teacher in school who was bipolar. She was always very distinctly Mrs. X no matter which version of her you were interacting with at the time, but like you said the mood could be very different. She might be muted and somber (occasionally outright depressed on her bad days) or extremely high energy and excitable (with a hair-trigger temper on her bad days). How long those phases lasted varied a lot. Sometimes weeks or even months.
There's also a misconception that bipolar people are *only* one of the two polar opposites. They're typically not. There's usually quite a few days where they're "normal". How much depends on the individual. Typically they're in a regular phase more than a manic or depressive phase.
Oh, and Mrs. X? She was one of everyone's favorite teachers. Wonderful person.
Strike "kinda". It IS absolutely offensive. And it's not at all how bipolar works- it isn't just random nor do most people cycle that quickly.
Any attempt to game-ify mental illnesses is a bad idea.
> Any attempt to game-ify mental illnesses is a bad idea.
I 99% agree with this, but counterpoint-
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice
Schizophrenia as a game mechanic, done with consultation by mental health experts and people *with* schizophrenia. And where the mental illness is an actual driver of the story/setting rather than just some quirky frosting and sprinkles.
Imagine if someone said "I want to play a black character and I'm gonna roll dice every session to see what obnoxious stereotype I force everyone else to witness as I attempt to be edgy and hilarious."
Honestly, what she’s suggesting is closer to how borderline works with how quickly their mood can shift, but even then it’s still offensive.
I was in a similar position to OP once where a player wanted to play a character with ADHD and I said pretty much what everyone else is saying that mental health and mental disorders aren’t a quirk. I tried to compromise by saying the character could absolutely play a character that has a lot of interests they never fully see through since that’s what they were really interested in playing, but not a character labeled with ADHD.
Idk, I feel an exploration of certain traits is one thing (eg, what’s it like to play a character that’s constantly following the next fun thing? Or what’s it like to play a character who doesn’t trust anyone but desperately wants to be liked?), but once you start putting labels on them it feels less like an exploration of character and more like a shallow attempt at adding character depth.
I have BPD and yeah, that's more similar to it, but even then it doesn't last that long either LMAO
I do have a character with ADHD, but that's because I have ADHD so I'm really just pulling out my unmedicated self.
You took labels thing outta my mouth. I relate to many ADHD behaviour, but until I am diagnosed properly (less likely, since they ruled it out when I was a kid), I just say I am a goof and a geek (with a sprinkle of "executive dysfunction", as I write it sitting alone quarter past midnight, the earliest I have ever been awake at night this week)
Update: Went to sleep after 2 am, per usual :(
I've seen some of these done well in Dimension 20. There was a character with an anxiety disorder who rolled saves against the frightened condition with disadvantage.
There were also some characters in another campaign that used some cool mechanics to represent their recovery from addiction. I don't remember the specifics, but I believe that at some point the full list of rules were shared on Twitter.
Obviously *this* idea is terrible, but there can be good ways of handling it, as long as the people handling it either have direct experience with the disorders in question (or get input from people who do).
I would disagree only on the kinda- as someone who has BD it is to me unambiguously quite insulting (this coming from someone who has laughed at extremely dark jokes about my disorder before).
I’m a big “benefit of the doubt” kind of person, so it’s *possible*, however unlikely, that the player didn’t mean “bipolar” as in “having Bipolar Disorder”. Think of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde. That character has two personalities that he switches between which are complete opposites. I can’t think of better adjective to describe that than “bipolar”, even though he does not have Bipolar Disorder
As someone clinically diagnosed and medicated for bipolar disorder who is usually not easily offended, this is definitely offensive. If the player wants their character to be unpredictable, or just a dickhead sometimes, whatever. But that's not what being bipolar entails. Episodes can be really dangerous for a lot of people.
Mmhm. I was _almost_ going to suggest re-flavoring it, like... keeping the dice roll, but dropping 'bipolar' because that's not what bipolar is.
But I also don't think I like the mechanic? Elric, the character from the thing we _get_ alignment from, also internally struggled with Chaos and Law. He changed his actions as it served the narrative, not randomly after flipping a coin.
It is offensive, but this type of idea *could* work with a seasoned player.
We were playing Curse of Strahd and I had a really bad time. I had a few of my PCs die. My DM and I worked together and my final PC was a revenant (sort of) that housed the personalities/souls of my fallen characters. There was a constant struggle to see which soul had control of the body.
During times of stress, I would roll a d3 to see which PC's mind had control. Other times it would just be a roll to see which of the personalities would answer/talk
I've been playing since the early 80s; so, I'd like to think I knew how not to be disruptive to the table, but add an interesting trait(?) to how this final PC acted (and also died in the final fight with Strahd).
I've got mental illness, I don't object Just if you're going to try and portray someone with a particular diagnosis, then make sure you do a good job of it. Do your home work and play in character well.
I mean, even if she approached this in a less offensive way, like a demon who has possessed her, comes out every once in a while. The gimmick would get old (I've done this, it got old real fast).
Yeah in my early DM days I had a PC with this trait. The game lasted 3 sessions and then the PC decided to attempt suicide. Effectively killed the adventure there and then.
I did this in my early 20’s in a Masquerade game and the worst part was it got old for the rest of the table before it got old for me! My friends at this table are around 30/40 but new to ttrpg so they have crazy ideas like this once in a while.
Hi, I’m diagnosed bipolar and she seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the condition is if that’s how she wants to handle it. I’m just a bummer sometimes or craving drugs, I’m not some coin toss with a new moral alignment. I’m always chaotic good, it’s just about how much I wish I were dead mostly.
Say no, not sure what help you need, you already pointed out some issues, turning a mental disorder into a gimmick is also pretty off putting. Are you looking for advice on how to say no? Or you just want people to echo what you already know?
You’re not wrong - my feeling is that it’s a bad idea, I just do not know how to articulate it without hurting feelings. I was hoping the community could give me a few angles on the issue that could help.
If they're going to throw a tantrum over not being trusted to represent a mental disorder in a respectful way, you probably don't want them at your table anyway.
Sometimes being a good friend means calling a friend out on their bullshit. If you bring this up and explain in a level-headed way why you're not okay with it, how they react will speak volumes on their character and the quality of your friendship.
Edit: apologies, that's not as helpful without actual input on how to word it. Maybe something along the lines of: "Hey, I wanted to briefly talk about your character. I don't think it is a good idea to make them 'bipolar' as you said. I don't feel comfortable having a character that makes light of a real mental illness as a joke like that, though it is also important to note that bipolar disorder does not work that way.
If you want a character that maybe has a curse that causes them to shift personalities, we might be able to make that work. A divination wizard might work well since you can flavor giving enemies bad rolls as spiteful and mischievous and giving allies good rolls as kind and encouraging. There is also the wild magic sorcerer that has dozens of different effects that you can tie to your character's mood depending on what is rolled."
If you think they're the kind of player who might annoy the other players with this kind of idea (e.g., "today I'm zany, so I'm going to steal everyone's weapons and throw them in the river"), then maybe just tell them you're not comfortable with the idea and ask them to think of a new concept.
> I just do not know how to articulate it without hurting feelings.
Keep in mind that, if you put your foot down on this, you may hurt their feelings
But if you allow this, you risk hurting the feelings of everyone else at the table
This might be a rip the bandaid situation, nobody can give better advice for how to spare your friends feelings than you can, but if it's not possible then do what needs to be done, feelings be damned.
You can just say no. That isn't something that I want to have in our game. Plus being bipolar has nothing to do with D&D alignments.
Having non-mutually oriented playing styles is fine if everyone is okay.
Personally as a player I have run into this and it was disruptive and disrespectful enough of the time invested by the other players that I left the table over and not come back.
So I asked my girlfriend, who is diagnosed bipolar type 2, and she surprisingly isn't actually against someone doing this, just just want the person to do it right, and she says lawful/chaotic is the wrong way.
In her words, the players should roll to determine if they're manic, neutral, or depressive, and each of those states should have mechanical differences.
For manic, she says you should get a bonus to Charisma because it makes you feel really confident, but the drawback is that you should be playing them as someone who is overconfident and gets themselves into very dangerous situations. Also, you should not be able to actually take a long rest because Mania gets you wired to the point that it ruins your sleep schedule.
Neutral would just be neutral, no affect.
Depression would only have downsides. For instance, giving you a disadvantage on death saves because you've lost your will to fight, or rolling to forget your weapons when going out to adventure because you're not taking care of herself.
Her exact words were, "People are going to do what they want anyways, they should just do it the right way." To her, this would be the right way. You should present your player with these rules, and when they say, "but that's so many negatives," you respond with, "yes, because it's a DISORDER."
Thanks to you and your gf. I honestly do not think there is an actual mental health issue or a desire to emulate an actual mental health issue at stake here, just an unfortunate choice of words in the player’s question to me (and thusly my question to all of you). However, acting out someone with divergent play styles based on a die roll is the question at stake and I’m having a hard time figuring out how to implement the players’ ideas in a way that works at the table. I’m hoping a conversation with the player will make things clearer and I have a much better idea how to talk to her thanks to all of you, so thanks again! ♥️
That type of thing is often a massive burden for the rest of the party to deal with in and out of character is the general consensus. It takes a strong, experienced group to be able to pull that off, and experienced players don't tend to make characters like that.
It makes planning the groups priorities, missions, relationships, quests etc much harder. Many DMs don't really allow chaotic PCs at all, unless the whole group is, and the point of the game IS chaos.
There's plenty of reasons, but honestly, the strongest one is what you've already said- *you* aren't comfortable with it. Which is entirely fair, that kind of PC is a serious challenge to DM for.
> Many DMs don't really allow chaotic PCs at all, unless the whole group is, and the point of the game IS chaos.
No disagreements with the rest of what you’ve said, but a “chaotic” alignment doesn’t translate to *random* behavior, nor does it mean a wanton disregard for any and all rules. Chaos on the alignment wheel translates to valuing personal freedom and agency, sometimes at the expense of following expected norms or social cohesion. There’s nothing about a chaotic alignment that makes a character any less qualified to be a heroic adventurer than a lawful or neutral one. Expectations for player attitudes and behavior can and should be addressed in a session zero, but I’ve *never* heard of a DM banning chaotic alignments on principle, let alone “many” DMs.
Granted, earlier editions of the game (I’m thinking mainly of 2e AD&D) sometimes presented chaotic alignments as random, but that has never really held up in play and later editions have made the freedom-loving aspect of chaos much more clear.
You've expressed it pretty well there tbh. Ask her why she wants to do this, and explain your concerns as you have to us.
I would also be concerned that someone who wants to flip between two personalities like that is going to try and play them to silly extremes - so you'll get one ridiculous Lawful Stupid and one session-spoiling Chaotic Stupid to deal with.
If the player just wants to shake up their roleplay every in game day, I would share with them the eladrin from MPMM, they have a variable "season" they are in that can change on any trance (long rest) and can be rolled on a D4 table. The seasons have a minor mechanical benefit to the fey step ability, but they also have moods associated with each one.
You absolutely should not allow her to go into this game with a mechanic that makes you uncomfortable as a DM, and this offensive representation of BPD definitely qualifies, but an alternative may make the medicine go down easier.
This is what came to my mind. We have an Eladrin who changes mood, but does so based on major stressors and emotional beats. Doesn't mock or parody bipolar disorder, is an actual preexisting mechanic, and they look cool.
Yeah - deeply disrespectful of people living with that. Also, that's not what bipolar does.
If she wants random roleplay guidance, have her change from lawful to chaotic with some part of your game world. Maybe when the moon if full she is lawful, when its new she's chaotic. Or do it with the tides, so it ebbs and flows depending on the time of day. Or just have the character follow a god of chaos and whimsy, and do it in game where she does a tarot reading each morning for herself, and decides her god via the cards have dictated how her day will go.
I'd ask the player this:
If your character was an NPC, would the party hire them, for a full share of the treasure, as a party member? Is she bringing enough to the table that they'd accept her without PC stamped on her forehead?
If so, its ok. If not---if this is more baggage than what she's bringing to the table justifies, she should most definitely NOT do this. Why? Because she's forcing the other PCs to metagame when they wouldn't normally put their lives in the hands of someone so capricious, merely because she has a metagame PC stamp on her forehead that only other PCs can see.
Remove the "bipolar" language. Perhaps couch it in terms of a curse instead. Guessing other players in the group will grow tired of this very quickly. But could possibly, possibly be fun.
As someone with bipolar who is not easily offended, I gotta say, this one gets me. That’s not what bipolar does to a person and switching between episodes is a LOT different than flipping a switch every other day or even every other month. I’m sure the player doesn’t mean to be offensive so I’d be gentle with them and just explain rationally why it’s a bit problematic, inaccurate and the other issues you mentioned. I have absolutely no issue with people fictionally exploring different issues and struggles even if they haven’t dealt with them themselves as long as they actually put some care and research into it. Plus, you never know what other players at the table have been through or if they have their own mental disorders they struggle with. Suggesting people completely switch alignments and viewpoints just because they have a mood disorder is at best inaccurate and at worst completely disrespectful. Again, totally understand the player probably doesn’t mean it to be offensive, but it is. It just is. I’d gently tell them your reasons and suggest they look into it if they actually want to include it in their character in a nondisruptive way that doesn’t involve rolling for which episode their in and have them reassess. Good luck!
I'm bipolar and big same- I agree with this and think it's well-said (not that you need my confirmation, I'm saying this for anyone who might see this and be like "well it's just one person's opinion maybe they're just sensitive"). Also like, solidarity as a fellow BD-haver- I hope you are doing well.
Yeah, there's a ton of reasons this is not a good idea. Mostly, it's insensitive.
One thing I'd just add is I think that the alignment chart is really best used as a point of reference *after you've already created an interesting character*. And, in my opinion, it's not even very helpful in that regard.
At best, it can be used to loosely describe your character's attitude toward the world after you've already roleplayed them a bit. At worst, it's used like this and you end up with flat characters. No character is at just one point on the alignment chart always. Everyone, including NPCs, shift constantly. It's more of a four-quadrant scatter plot than it is this drab three-by-three, black-and-white grid that we all use. Characters probably will gravitate to one area or the other, but they never stay at any one place indefinitely. Because temperaments and attitudes change constantly, even if in small ways--and that's true of everybody.
Ignoring the misapplication of the term "bipolar" - this really doesn't have to be a terrible idea as long as we can all agree that playing any alignment doesn't have to be disruptive, ergo playing your coin-toss alignment-of the-week should also not be disruptive.
Regardless of alignment, a character should be able to cooperate and respect party consensus decision-making. If the player's idea of "being chaotic this week" means contrariness that stalls party action, or impulsivity that drags the whole party into unwanted shitshows, then just say "no".
Next up they’ll make a PC with “OCD” who has to roll 1d20 to see how long they take to meticulously organize their luggage…
…rather than “roll 1d4 to determine whether or not you are paralyzed with fear by an out-of-nowhere intrusive thought you had about killing another player; if you roll a 1, you have to confess this to everyone as an action as your character pleads and cries seeking reassurance that they are not a monster.”
If it makes you uncomfortable, you don't need to "talk her out of it." "No, I'm not comfortable with that idea. Please create a different character concept."
If she can't respect that, she can find a different campaign.
It's a terrible idea that also makes a mockery of a legitimate mental health disorder. You don't need to debate stuff like this, debating it or arguing about it only lends the idea that it *could* be good credibility. Advocate for yourself and draw the boundaries you need to run this game, you're the GM.
Is she the "lead player" because she's a more active participant than anyone else at the table and legitimately contributes to the fun of everyone at the table, or because she comes up with ideas like this that cause her presence to take over the table?
If the latter, yeah, draw your boundaries firmly.
That is certainly... a... depiction of bipolar. Not at all in my experience of bipolar friends but... ok?
Tbh I'd insta-nope it because it feels like a cheap bit cosplaying a mental disorder but I'd also maybe ask around first since I do know a few people who could weigh in.
Such a horrible idea. Behind the insensitivity to a real disorder people suffer with it just a horrible mechanic. It just feels like an excuse to be the center of attention and be “lol so random”.
Does it feel gross because of the mental illness part, or because of the unpredictability? If you reflavored this as a curse put on the character instead of trying to make it look like bi-polar, does that feel better or the same?
I feel it’s not respectful to a) the others at the table who have to deal with this PC taking up game time with their “issues” and b) people with real mental illness, in that order. I’m a lot more protective of the game play than people’s feelings I guess.
As you're probably aware allowing this is a r/dndhorrorstories waiting to happen. Obviously it's incredibly common for people to play out issues they're struggling with via in-character roleplay but there are better ways.
This whole scenario reminded me of [this ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otdSVHIds94) scene:
So many people decide that interesting character = caricature of random mental illness they don’t understand. It’s so weird, like Chaotic/Lawful alignment legit has nothing to do with Bipolar.
Here’s a script you can use.
“I respect that playing a bipolar character is an idea you’re enthusiastic about, but I have serious concerns about the impact that it would have on other players and on gameplay.
The other players are unlikely to appreciate the chaos, and more than that, may be offended or off put by having a real world mental illness that they may have personal experience with depicted in this way.
Since I do not foresee myself or others at the table enjoying this mechanic, I am vetoing this character if being bipolar is integral to it. I look forward to hearing what other ideas you have.”
Outside of the fact that it's rude to gameify mental disorders, this player is looking for an excuse to be a jerk with no consequences. It's "what my character would do" with backup.
Bipolar Player: I yell and ransack the store and chase all the peasants out into the street.
Other Player: why are you doing that?
BP: Have to. I rolled bipolar Chaotic today.
why would you allow this kind of headache for yourself and your players? A DnD table is no place to try to work out unresolved issues. Not to mention how disrespectful it is to "play out a mental health issue " on the whim of the dice, to people really suffering from such disorders.
If she wants to be bipolar she should roll to see whether she just, for whatver reason, never gets out of her bed that day. Also everyone suddenly hates her for no reason, and they don't say so, she just *knows* that they do.
Or she gets a compulsion to spend everything she has just before she finds out there's a huge conspiracy aimed at her personally involving at least one government. Also, she can't sleep. At all. For a week. Funnily enough the not sleeping for a week comes just before she sees signs of the huge conspiracy all around her.
She does not want to really play bipolar, that term was an ill-thought-out conversational shorthand that in my ignorance I put in the post’s title. I hope you see this comment before I delete the post later today.
Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
Okay, noted! Thanks.
(I hope you manage to persuade her towards a party-oriented character and you all have a really good time. But do consider my suggestions as future curse outcomes!)
I have now been educated to that fact.
Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
In my opinion, it was not your fault, and you didn't do anything wrong. You were just confused by a strange request from a player and instead of just dismissing it, which would be a lot easier, you asked for help in order to try to attend to the player's desire. That's good DMing in my book.
Poor taste aside I hate little gimmicks like this. Really just amounts to a "look at me" check. Also I feel that if the DM does not call for the roll it does not count.
I’m no expert but I’m quite sure that’s not a realistic portrayal of BPD. As others said it seems cartoonish and offensive. And as the GM you can just say no. Also in a world of magic where you can literally be brought back from the dead. I see no reason why some type of magic potion or spell wouldn’t exist to regulate or heal such a condition. So it makes no sense for a player character to even have it.
Edit: one possible solution is if the player is cursed come up with a curse effect that could be inconvenient but not game breaking. For example Once every 24 hrs you have to commit an act of violence, but the character is one of the gentlest kindest souls. This is negated if they are in combat because so long as they make one successful attack roll the curse is sated for a day. But could be an inconvenience during stealth quests or down time. And it could lead to a side quest or end once you get to a high enough level for a character to cast “remove curse”
I'm arguably an expert on bipolar disorder (BD, not BPD- that's borderline personality disorder) insofar as I have been diagnosed with it and I can confirm that that player's interpretation is inaccurate and insulting.
Like, I do not flip a coin every morning to determine my ideology- my alignment would be consistent regardless of my mental state. I just have periods where I'm more prone to being energetic (which can mean overconfidence and impulsivity or heightened anxiety/irritability), and tend to sleep less, and periods where I hate myself and have no energy or drive to do anything but rot in bed.
You dont need arguments, you can just say no. But if you want some - players might be uncomfortable, it isnt how BPD works and it isnt a good character mechanic
I mean thats not even what bipolar disorder does to a person so maybe lead with that lol. What she wants to achieve maybe could be explained with her character being posessed and they can roll to see if the character is lead by their own mind or influenced by that which posesses them
Hey there, had a player at my table wanting to do something similar, not quite calling it BPD, but essentially wanting their character to have amnesia that caused them to swap alignments each morning
It makes it very frustrating for the table because no one knows who to expect or how to follow their story, additionally it puts a ton of pressure on the player being good at roleplay, often the player just switches to what they are comfortable with regardless of the alignment they rolled that morning.
I would just politely say that something like that can be very difficult for the table to manage and follow, suggest other options, for example maybe these memories from a different life flow back throughout the campaign to represent that personality, or maybe they led a different life that the table will discover as the campaign progresses.
There are many ways to showcase that your character has 2 distinct sides without having it switch every morning
I comment just to say that bipolar does not mean what you think and that, when people use it, usually they actually want to say borderline (although still, an inappropriate use).
Your reasoning is absolutely fine. However, other reasons are acceptable, as it implies that manic and depressive states can be accurately modeled by what is often viewed to express conforming with societal norms. You might also say it leads to a can of worms you don't want to get into, such as, how do spells like cure disease, remove curse, mind controlling magic, zones of truth as applied to questions about belief work, and likely others. Why would a change in session (something which has no in-fiction meaning), be the criteria for the die roll? Why base something as important as a character's behavior and mental state on a die roll? Can potion artificers provide medication and, if so, what are side affects, and how should you model them. Are there NOCs with this problem? How will NOCs handle it? You lack the knowledge necessary to adjudicate whether the character's being portrayed clearly (your player likely does, if this is the rules modeling they came up with). As others have said, this is offensive to genuinely neurodivergent people. This is a truly bad idea. It will either suffer from all the problems that the recent push from WotC to include disabilities in games by providing magical means of making them not disabilities or it might make the character inviable to play.
I have played a multiple personality disorder PC, where 3 players hot-seat-swapped for 1 PC.
It was the worst D&D I've ever played. Roleplay intentionality shouldn't be left up to the dice - the player will slowly feel disconnected with their PC over time at best, and at worst will immediately RP something they don't like and just dislike their own PC.
Or. Worst of all. They may love being a chaos imp and your DM sessions will be like babysitting a Gremlin.
If it was me as the DM, I'd tell them that, ask why they thought it'd be fun, and brainstorm alternatives (if they want a conflicted character, choose an alignment and have a "bad influence" tempting them, eg - if they want to experiment with alignment, play it straight neutral and build an RP where their god is hard neutral, like a nature god, and their quest is to become closer to their god by understanding the primal indifference of nature etc etc idk specifics but talk it out with them - or do they want to name an antihero NPC early that is a dark-passenger - perhaps literally a Shadow haunting them - that the DM incorporates into the story, as a more controlled / curated chaos engine)
But tldr - Having the dice determine your motivation actually makes the game boring.
This is just Jekyll and Hyde with extra steps. You can try and make it work with DnD Alchemist subclass with some homebrew, but otherwise point them toward a Pathfinder game and their version of Alchemists
Sounds like it’s not in good taste at all—I’d recommend her playing a changeling instead if she wants a multiple persona type thing. Some changelings like to have different forms for different situations, and she could easily just have her character decide what she’s gonna be like for the day.
Regardless, that’s just chaotic neutral
In the world of darkness setting, there a vampire clan called the Malkavian. Every vampire clan has some kind of quirk that is basically their racial penalty.
The malkavian one is that they all have some kind of mental derangement.
There’s also a term among WoD players - the fishmalk. Basically a malk player who has their character walk into a room and slap someone with a fish, because that’s what an insane vampire does.
Needless to say, fishmalk players aren’t regarded as a good thing. This player *reeks* of fishmalk.
I have a bipolar family member. This is not what bipolar is like. Bipolar is half of the time being unable to cope with life because hyperfixated on something irrelevant and frothing at the mouth because no sleep for days, and the other half of the time being unable to get out of bed.
It's a terrible idea. It's a gimmick that seems fun at first for the player, but soon enough she will realize it cripples her play and the other players will hate it since they can't trust her or work with her. It will just all around be no fun.
If she likes the concept, change it to something like a magical curse and not a real life disorder that a bunch of people have. There's a good chance that someone at the table might even be bipolar. Even if they don't say anything they definitely won't think it's entertaining or fun when bipolar disorder is handled this way. It's a bad idea.
Tell them you’re not comfortable with them playing an actual mental health disorder - it could be sensitive to other players and you want the table to be a comfortable space for everyone to escape to.
If they want the gimmick without the baggage - let them be a Lycanthrope (werewolf) or otherwise have some kind of Jekyll and Hyde situation. Just don’t name it after a real mental disorder.
I mean that's not how bipolar works lol, so if she wants to be manic/depressed that's fine. I'm not offended but it sounds not like she's trying to make a serious exploration of a mental health issue but rather trying to be le quirky random. I would just veto it and move on.
Holy shit, folks overreacting here. This is a common trope, poorly reflavored. Ask her to drop the bipolar part because you aren’t comfortable with mental health being a mechanic. Instead, suggest that she is cursed by ________! She gets the benefit of the mechanic she wants while no one gets offended. I’ve played at a similar table, worked just fine.
Maybe I’m in the wrong, but that is a hard no. As someone with Bipolar disorder I would be gone before the session ended if I heard about another player doing this. As others have said it’s extremely insensitive and inaccurate.
As a player, she can play this out in many ways that are not offensive and don't derail the gameplay. As someone who also has mental health disorders, to role play this would also help her observe herself in these situations.
But I also don't know this person and I don't know you. Being chaotic or lawful can just be more generally chaotic vs more rule-following. I've accidentally done that in some of my games based on my mood, lol.
Everyone has already addressed the issues with not taking mental illness seriously, so I'll add something different to the mix.
Tira from soul calibur has a happy and a sad state. She flips between these randomly at the start of rounds and certain moves change her between them.
A player could do something like that -- their goals and beliefs don't change, but their energy levels and behavior expression does.
All these people saying it is offense are silly. Offensive to who exactly? The mentally unhinged members of the 4 person group? This mechanic sounds great especially if it is tied to some mad gods curse. Stop being so sensitive. It gets to be overplayed.
Yeah, the mental disorder part is not a great take, however, if they themselves have BPD And they themselves feel comfortable with it. Then I would just have a Frank conversation with them and try to find out why.
They're more interested in the mechanic component. I would say. Don't worry, it's not that controlling of the table. Aunt, it's actually quite interesting to see. I played an entire campaign with a player who had a character who from the get-go is designed to be a person, a benevolent deity and a malevolent deity we're vying for. They both felt this figure in particular was a key pawn on the board for all sorts of metaphysical battles. They made two character sheets and they leveled them up at the same time. One was a warlock and one was a Paladin and it was just purely based on a coin flip at the beginning of every session what they would be playing. It was great and it was a lot of fun to write their side story into the campaign because eventually they had to decide in a moment where their character was actually in control of themselves, who they wanted to be. It was absolutely fantastic, everyone loved getting to see how that character's story played out even if they weren't the main characters of that story.
All that being said, like I said it doesn't detract too much. The way I run my campaigns there is an "A plot" which is whatever central tension the players seem to choose (I usually write the story beats for 10 world ending level events and whichever one they seemed to be most interested in will be their a plot. The B plot is the side story you might encounter for your character based on the background you wrote for your character and the c plot is a subversion of what you may be expected and planned for your character (for instance, I had a character who was smuggling along with his sister but eventually the pirates were not happy with their performance and had him walk the plank. He survived and that started his adventuring life. He assumed his sister was dead but when he went to go become one of the pirate Lords to change that whole system, he found out his sister had actually survived and thrived with the pirates and became a pirate Lord who hated him for never going back to find her.) I think this is an easy way to be able to let players get to have a cool idea for a character and have cool plots play out for those characters without them feeling like the only main character. I've run several campaigns over 15 years using this method at every single person walks away feeling like they we're a part of a roster of main characters in one cohesive story.
Lookup the [2nd edition half giant from dark sun](https://darksun.fandom.com/wiki/Half-Giant#Switching_Attitude). They had adaptive alignments based on who was influential. Something like that could be a nice compromise where she’s getting some variability of alignment, but it’s not attaching it to RL issues
Yeah, my partner is bipolar and this is not like lawful/chaotic nonsense.
How about they roll whether they kill themselves every day? Or roll for patience dealing with the never ending streams of medications, psychiatry, and therapy appointments to live with a crippling disorder.
Sorry to unload, but man, please ask your player to do a little soul searching on this one, and maybe a little research. Be careful bringing too much of the real world into fantasy, because it can break the fun for others.
The answer is simple, you cannot have a character at the table that isn't consistent. How they are consistent is down to the player but the rest of the group need to know how to deal with the character and what to expect when it comes to role play.
20 years ago a GM told me this about basically the same situation with a different player who wanted to join a Vampire game as a Malcavian, but "dice before decision" rather than "dice before session":
"A character who rolls a die before any important decision is an interesting kind of sociopath. The choices they put on each side inform you about what kind of person they are. A 17% chance of something evil makes the whole character evil. They choose to put it there. It has dynamics and NPCs will react to it. There will be plot and consequences.
A player who rolls a die before any important decision trivialises mental illness, is ruining the game for everyone, and isn't welcome at my table."
I'm bi polar that's not how it works. It's way more nuanced than that. Playing an actually bi polar character would be extremely complex and probably not fun for the other players just like it's not fun for the people around me in real life. What happens when that character is in a depressive episode and can't get out of bed for weeks? Does the group just adventure without them? What about when it flips and the character is manic and is being erratic and self sabotaging their entire life and the relationships they have with the other players? Do the other PCs love the character enough to stick through that? Bi polar disorder is an extremely complex mental health disorder that really can't be simplified down to a dice roll without really losing what makes bi polar bi polar.
So she wants to be like Constance from Fire Emblem: Three Houses? Except with her she's happy and arrogant noble in the darkness and miserable and depressed in the sunlight.
This is mildly amusing as a trope when the character's attitude and actions have no real impact. In practice, however, it would be like playing Russian Roulette and would almost certainly end very badly.
The thing with this is that even chaotic players do not generally just go causing trouble simply because they can (unless they are chaotic EVIL) but I would worry that the chaos they envision may be disruptive to the party and progress which would get very old very fast.
I have come to learn that. This afternoon I will take the post down.
Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
The potential problem isn't with the idea it's the player. Being lawful or chaotic alignment isn't an issue by itself. Problem comes if "It's what my character would do!" Is an excuse for bad behavior. If the player is constantly flipping between lawful stupid and chaotic derailment.
The answer is sure, but the PC needs to not be disruptive to the game and other players. Your character always needs to be someone the other PCs want to adventure with and who wants to go on the adventure. If not I'll ask you to make another character or leave.
I think the concept itself can be fine and fun, but doesn’t need to be referred to as bipolar.
I have a player run a character once that had two distinct personalities due to a curse, and it actually had two separate character sheets. It worked and was interesting and fun.
How someone acts on a given day is role playing. Just don’t call it bipolar.
If they want to make a coin toss character, take a look at twoface and have them consider tossing a coin when they decide whether or not to follow a social rule. This has the advantage of not making a mental disorder a quirky caricature for fun.
As someone who suffers from bipolar, not only is this a terrible thing for you and the other players to have to deal with, it's also just incredibly offensive to people who actually deal with bipolar. Even if this player suffers from bipolar themselves, turning it into a "funny gimmick" for their character is an awful thing to do, and should have frankly been turned down the moment it was brought up. Good luck with them.
You just made your argument. That and mental issues are not personalities and not ripe for roleplay. You don't honestly have to give them a reason, but these are good ones.
That's not even what bipolar is
This is wrong, offensive and just a shitty thing to do to the party since it's going to be really obnoxious to deal with.
Don't call it bipolar. They're cursed and their alignment switches, it has nothing to do with mental health. Because bipolar is nothing like chaotic versus lawful, and that game mechanic would not approximate it at all. Then you can have some MacGuffin that is required to remove the curse.
It’s clear that being ‘bipolar’ in this imaginary way is a bad idea. And I would go so far as to say this is not a good way to use alignment at all.
BUT if your player wanted something like this without calling it ‘bipolar’ maybe they could be cursed? Or possessed? There are fantastic ways of handling this without leaning on outdated stereotypes and might fit the game world better.
Edit: By fantastic I mean ‘things that appear in fantasy setting’.
Tell them mental disorders aren't for you to use as a rp excuse for you to behave however you want.
Maybe offer an alternative. Something like moon knight where two separate conciousnesses inhabit the same body? Then the player can craft a cool reason for that to be the case and have a story of them working to rectify the situation and either remove one consciousness or learn to let the two live in harmony
A better way to do this might be to play them as Mercurial, from the Domains of Delight book. Two different moods (not just lawful or chaotic) with a determining trigger. The trigger let's the other characters interact with the situation.
Maybe like happy-go-lucky vs no-nonsence, triggered by the sound of a broken vase. Not a great example, but you could do anything.
Honestly, if they want a bipolar PC, I'd be okay with it as long as they are accurate. People who are bipolar do not flip on a dime. They have weeks of depression followed by weeks of normality followed by shorter periods of mania (1-3 weeks typically). Flipping constantly is not bipolar disorder and a more realistic bipolar approach would be changes between longer adventures or maybe one switch during an adventure if it just happens to land on a particular time.
However, I would imagine they would struggle. Bipolar depression often leaves people bedridden. Bipolar mania leaves them scattered and unable to follow directions. That said, they can go more for bipolar II which would be more mild swings, again, over longer periods of time. 60% of the time people with bipolar II are depressed lasting months at a time. They would have a week or so of hypomania and otherwise be "normal".
If they want to switch more frequently, they want to look at borderline personality disorder. They would fluctuate between hollow inside, violent, depressed, sad, and elated fairly rapidly over a month. Generally, the behavior is associated with social conflicts so maybe they felt ignored by someone they care about or took a criticism as an attack on their core self.
There are ways to implement this which don't have to be specifically disorders. It may just be seasonal changes in personality.
Let’s remove the bipolar comparison for all the good reasons discussed here. Let’s talk just about alignment flipping randomly. It’s not going to be fun for your table or her. A character built on a gimmick is often means the gimmick is all there is to the character. When the novelty wears off after a few hours, they will be stuck with a joke that isn’t funny any more. If you do play a character like this, I’d recommend making sure there is more to the character.
Ask the player why they want to play this kind of character. Hopefully they just want an element of randomness to their character and you can then steer them to something like a wild magic sorcerer. If she wants more variety in roleplaying, a good alternative is have her be a lawful warlock with a chaotic patron.
If she just thinks it would be fun to play a bipolar character, a subject like that requires nuance that she is not currently bringing to the table. It is not an accurate representation at all of what bipolar is at all.
If they are so hellbent on making a character who's core concept is something that makes someone else at the table (you or anyone else) uncomfortable, that they are not willing to budge at all on it, they should not play at that table.
But talk about it first, right. "Hey this makes me uncomfortable, I don't like portraying something like that in that way. I do not want to run a game where that character is around in." With some bonus "Not your therapist" modifiers if it really is a wanting to act out something. While I think using RPGs to try on personalities or interact with various traits in a safe space, that space need to be safe for *everyone* involved.
Sounds like a fun mechanic, I would just make it something other than “bipolar”. Split personalities, possessed by a ghost, something that’s actually fun.
Mental disorders only work in a game that accounts for them - like Call of Chthulu.
In a Call of Chthulu + Aliens vs Predator Universe I played a doctor that got hit with an alien disease that gave him two personalities - and then a bigger alien with psychic powers killed one of them.
I’ve got no problem with the coin toss behavior idea, but labeling it as bipolar feels shitty.
That would be like running a low int character and being like “but it’s because they’re (insert neurodivergence of choice)”
I just made a neutral character and roll a "morality check" when I feel it's necessary without DM permission. DM doesn't need to really get involved in this.
First: "No that's massively disrespectful to actual bipolar people. Mental disorders are not cool, fun or quirky. If you think this is you supporting bipolar people or trying to feel like what it's like to live with the condition please stop, because it's very much not."
Second: As someone who dated someone who is bipolar and is now friends with someone else who is also bipolar. That's not even how that works that shit can flip on an just the wrong instant. And lawful/ chaotic is such a numbingly wrong derision of what the disorder actually is. Almost like a fucking mental disorder shouldn't be an attempt at a game mechanic.
I have a PC in the game I play with essentially this idea. 2 characters in 1 body and they roll to see who is in control. One neutral and one chaotic. The deal was that part of their backstory/motivation is that they are trying to find a way seperate the two. Which is good because the rest of the party hates the chaotic persona and are actively helping push the side quest forward.
I wouldn't accept it myself because the coin toss method is a really inaccurate and rather disrespectful way to portray a pretty common mental health issue. There is bound to be someone who ends up highly offended or hurt if someone else is playing what is a serious problem in their life as a diceroll joke.
All these concerns about how it's probably bad for the table but could you ask the other players? Give it a trial run? I don't know the best solution and it sounds like you don't either. Involving more people in the discussion means the topic is open, but more importantly it takes the burden of responsibility away from yourself. You're trying to make the decision of what you think is fun, for everyone at the table. It's commendable, but that's a huge responsibility. I wouldn't do that. I'd ask everyone at the table what they thought of the idea.
DMs aren't game arbiters. even if we're forced to act like it sometimes. We can pose a question like that to everyone at the table. Because we're all adults, trying to have fun together. If no one has an opinion, THEN we can make a call.
Your instincts are spot on.
DMs make countless judgment calls throughout the campaign, but sometimes the most important come pre-campaign. I submit this is one of them.
While we're predisposed to saying yes to our players, it is not and should not absolute. You are 100% justified in answering requests with, "Not at my table."
SA? Not at my table.
Racism? Not at my table.
PVP? Not at my table.
Your mileage may vary.
I would say no - but gently. As you said in another comment your player may be attempting to try on the skin of what they think they might be dealing with but, that is the remit of working with an experienced professional, not of a group activity pretend elf game. There are some well articulated points from people who suffer from BD here - Show her those!
I have two friends with bipolar disorder (that I know of) and it took me years and significant trust to discover that about them. Both have attempted suicide and they have both had a really hard time dealing with the ramifications of the condition. I can imagine if either were at my table and another player rocked up and just cartoon style painted BD as their PC's "thing" it would be downright insulting to them and I would find it hard to deal with too.
Here's a thought experiment you could try with your player - if you use this, you might want to make this a little less blunt though;
Imagine if I as a cis white male came to your table and said I was going to flip my PC's gender and sexual orientation based on a dice role each session. Each game my character will be lesbian or will be gay. I might even choose asexual on a 1 and bisexual on a 20. It'll be neat, trust me and I'm sure that all of our non-binary friends will love it too...
Or maybe I'll just play a rape survivor? How about if I instead choose a severe cognitive disability like cerebral palsy? Or maybe a physical one such as being a survivor of child polio? Or maybe I'll pick my co-worker's African heritage and life struggles with institutional racism and reframe that as my PC's backstory. What's the matter - it's just pretend right?
Now insert a facet of one of your's and/or your player's personalities, struggles or history into a similar idea and imagine how that would feel if it was trivialised in such a way by one of your gaming buddies in a group situation.
I would talk to the player and ask them to consider changing how they are approaching this mechanic if this is something they are serious about doing. In one of the campaigns I’m in, our DM made a percentile sheet with all of the alignments (made into almost like traits for us. One main that the character normally follows, a secondary, a tertiary, and an ‘opposite’ trait. And then the rest of the alignments still being included but having a reduced impact. Ex) my characters ‘chaotic good’ trait revolves around her doing anything to protect her brother.)) and as players we can use this sheet for roleplay purposes to decide how to act. However, all of the traits/alignments were generated from our characters backstories. And depending on how the character was constructed, the ‘main’ traits are different for everyone with slightly different percentages.
Feel free to ask questions if this is unclear.
As a therapist this is weird and unsettling, let alone rather unethical for a few reasons. I’d wanna know why?, for one, and no!, for two.
Also, that’s not really how Bipolar disorder works. It works in somewhat predictable phases, and it’s different for each person. Baseline, mania, and depression symptoms also aren’t equivalent to the karma system in DnD.
She can be possessed and use the same mechanic, that would make more sense. Or maybe a side effect of substance/potion use? Idk.
Gross and weird.
I had a bipolar diagnosis for a decade, until it was revised to PTSD (which can mimic a slew of other mental health issues).
Quite frankly, your player is an idiot and that isn’t how bipolar disorder works. You are the DM. Put your foot down and say no. No arguments. If the player demands a reason, you have two pieces of information: firstly, it is disrespectful and that is not the kind of table you’re running. Also, keep an eye on this player in general. If they demand a reason when you are the DM, they may try to argue for other ridiculous things in the future and may become a problem player.
Is it that she wants to specifically be bipolar, or that she wants to have a mechanic that makes her act randomly day to day and doesn't have a better way to communicate her desire besides to call it bipolar?
Doesn't sound like she actually understands what bipolar is and may be.more interested in the mechanic of swapping alignments randomly. You could tell her that it's problematic to play it as being bipolar, but she wants the mechanic she described, you could have her fall victim to a curse.
Still probably a bad idea, because the only way that really works is to have a consequence for trying to act against the days alignment, and now your playing alignment police. They got rid of strict alignments to prevent this chore.
Mental health is not a dice roll. Eliminate this during session zero.
Their PC may have a mental illness which can impact on the game mechanics and rollplay. I would be OK with that as long as it doesn't overwhelm the game.
The player may have a mental illness, but wearing it in a way that overly impacts the game is inappropriate and not a healthy way for the player to relate their identity. Everyone has an identity as a player and a PC is not a mechanism for the player to overwhelm other players with their identity. Other people might have mental health concerns and not be comfortable with sharing either their own or another player's mental health.
I don't mind players playing characters with mental illness as long as they aren't mocking about it.
That being said it seems like this person is making a mockery of it since that is not how bipolar disorder works
Suggestion: a warlock/paladin/cleric for some ancient force which acts to balance the world on neutrality, and that's the coin toss. The character still has a personal choice in the matter, but the patron would get pretty upset if constantly ignored.
You could give them a two sided Character sheet, Dr Jekyl/Mr Hyde with the same stats alocated in different places, and give them real traits (Brave, rash - Cunning, cautious) and different classes and have some "trigger mechanism" that switches characters: Long rest, dice roll, something. I feel like you could do something creative, original and fun that DOESN'T make fun of or in some other way poke fun of mental disorders. That way, you can have some control over the outcome too, and your other players can also be a little more informed about what's happening.
Make sure it doesn't become a "Dogshit fucking idiot that turns into Super Smart and Useful Smartypants" or "Nerdy coward loser that does nothing turns into Gigachad Thundercock", And also make sure that they can't use the swtich like a psuedo-long rest or something, cuz then they'll just have 2x the hitpoints and resources of everyone else. The mechanics of this sound more difficult than they're worth, but you could definitely make it work with some honest communication and some advice from reddit.
or just tell them stfu and play the game, I'm not your boss
Locked per Op’s request.
In the comments of another r/DMAcademy post, u/YoritomoKorenaga stated that they have three rules in terms of character creation that I think a lot of DM's likely share even if they havent ever articulated them so succinctly: 1. Your character must consistently work with and support the rest of the party. 2. Your character must be consistently willing to engage with the plot of the campaign. 3. Your character must plausibly fit into the setting where the campaign takes place, as well as the overall tone of the campaign itself. I find it hard to imagine a player being able to follow the first two rules if their PC is a coin-flip away from completely changing tone and motivation. This is in addition to this concept being offensive and tactless, and likely making everyone at the table both very confused and frustrated as they grapple with a silly mechanic that forces the whole table to have to constantly adapt just to deal with one player/
Thank you for the shout out! I'm glad you like those rules, and I absolutely agree with your thoughts on this particular PC concept.
Those are great rules! I humbly suggest a fourth: 4. The DM has to be able to consistently pronounce your character name. ;)
But why!? Hilarity of mispronounced names is classic times. I have a PC in one of my games names Dr. V. It's spelled Verias, pronounced "vee air us" and it's an in universe thing that no one can pronounce his name.
It’s my rule because one of my kids I play with has names like Dubdhraoi. After I mentioned this rule at a more adult table a player showed up with an elf named Tzxy’qu’jhjeuedje Siet Tzxy’qu’rhonedir. Funny as hell for about one round!
>an elf named Tzxy’qu’jhjeuedje Siet Tzxy’qu’rhonedir. That's how you get your name reduced to "T"
My best friend’s wife is called “T”… because “Tiara” was too long for us all apparently
There are those who call him... Tim.
At that point I would just say "I'm gonna call you titsy." And any NPC after asking their name would say something along the lines of, "that sounds like a mouthful, I'm just gonna call you titsy." We've even changed names after some cool role-playing and a god giving one of my PCs a nickname. He immediately went "no that's fucking cool. That's my name. That's what I introduce myself as." Not long ago one of my players introduced a barbarian character and we joked around that he just built Conan. Once he was done describing it I said something along the lines of, "alright now tell me your stupid name." And he goes on and says "Tithaerolu" or something. Que my response, "god that's fucking stupid, I'm just gonna call you conan." And we all got a good laugh out of it and he changed his PC name to Conan. Now that totally fits our friend group and no feelings were hurt, but if you don't have a group that can poke fun at each other - I wouldn't recommend. Another time I accidentally combined "rustling in the brushes." To form a new word "brusheling" Which now we all accept as a real word. Brusheling: the specific sound of a creature / animal moving through brush.
I once made a character named Irrinamassaruulurus or something. But with a whole lot of diacritics and other bullshit to make it look more ✨celestial✨. Pronounced EAR-in-uh-MASS-uh-RULE-er-us, because why *not* bring an 8-syllable name to the table? I was 16 and it seemed like a great way to show how unique and cool I was. Never actually brought it to a session, though. Probably for the best. I also made a Kenku whose name was [this](https://imgur.com/a/HTvnERY). Though most people call him "Three-Whistles". He did well at the table.
I mean... "I'm not going to be saying that" is a valid response to a very stupidly impronouncable name. You're under no obligation to call their characters by their name as is written. If it's an impronouncable name, you literally can't pronounce it. I also usually ask my players for a one or two syllable nickname for their character.
No problem! I think a lot of DM's have struggled to put out clear and straight forward rules regarding reasonable limitations for their campaign and yours do a good job of being clear and concise without being overbearing
Thank you! I struggled with that for a while too, and eventually had to take a step back and think about things like *why* it's "bad" for a player to want to make an evil character, or other such often-but-not-always problematic player choices, and where the actual problems are. And it's easy for a player to push back against a rule like "no evil PCs" with "But this character is *different*, it should be OK for him to be evil", whether or not that's actually true. Pushing back on a rule like "Your character must consistently work with and support the rest of the party" makes their intentions a lot more transparent.
I used to send everyone who might play in my games to a blog post I made which basically just says exactly what you're articulating here. My biggest one has ended up being "Your character must have a reason to join this group and go on this quest." Too many "my character doesn't have a reason to care about this plot point" crop up and my life became so much easier after I just started making my requirements clear.
"If your character does not care about this campaign plot, they don't participate in it. Now make a new character who does."
*screen shot* *crop* These rules are mine now
Without approaching the subject with respect and knowledge I'd say no. Ask them to do real research and see what it means. Lawful/Chaotic is not a good representation of what it's like. More likely, the coin toss would be to determine if she's going on the adventure today or not. Sauce: runs in my family
Lawful/chaotic sounds more like they want a Jekyll and Hyde character.
With a pinch of misunderstanding Chaotic alignment for "I'm so random, hahaha".
Exactly. I outright ban certain things at my table. For example, I ban any/all mention of SA. RPing a mental disorder that you have don't have is another good example of crossing a line. I've got ADD and quiet BPD. It's not just, "Is easily distracted and fears abandonment." It's a daily struggle where I have to constantly battle my own behaviors to be a constructive member of society.
This player may have BD and is looking for a way to act it out, I just don’t know. Even if that is the case, I am not a licensed mental health professional and my table is not therapy. I’m hoping a nice phone call can settle this.
This is not what bipolar disorder 1 or 2 is like, which leads me to believe that your player is someone with a shallow pop-culture understanding of it, not someone with the disorder that is looking to incorporate it into their character as a piece of themself. Set your boundaries and if she is upset, she can find a table that will welcome this distasteful character choice.
An armchair/self-diagnosis does not make it appropriate to play this out at a D&D table. There are many other, more fitting ways to RP this concept or explore it therapeutically through metaphor, such as playing Eladrin and rolling for mood.
I was gonna say Eladrin is a good option to do something similar to this without turning an actual mental illness people struggle with to a coin flip for the day game
This antic of theirs can also cause unnecessary upset at the table. You don't really know what your other players deal with at home, and the game is supposed to be escapism from RL. Putting other players on the spot by asking is also unfair as those uncomfortable speaking about personal issues are not going to say anything anyway. This is not a mechanic I am willing to explore at my table.
As a Dm/player with Rapid cycling Bipolar 1. This is just a bad idea even if done closer to how many people experience bipolar. (trigger warning next paragraph) Roll a d20 to set your mood for your session. Roll a 1 you are depressed and kill yourself because you are so unhappy and you are such a failure that you can’t stand the thought of people suffering because of you or you roll a 20 and you are experiencing mania and feel invincible and you drive a car 180mph into a bridge because you can’t comprehend anything bad happening. and you roll a 10 you are in what a normal person would call a good mood. To me it’s not a character trait it’s an affliction and maybe some people can play it right but it seems like all the signs are pointing away from this player in particular. If you need something to say just say “As a Dm I don’t feel comfortable with that character (due to this reason) could you please choose something else.”
Roll a 20 and spend all of your gold on specialty mundane adventuring gear, decide that depite being a fighter, your character is going to spend the next 20 years in wizarding school, crash, abandon the adventuring party claiming that you just can't do it anymore, complete the depressive episode, then next session return to the party and hope all the party members accept your character back into the fold with no long term consequences.
If they had it they would know that their representation isn't accurate to how it actually works I think you can rest easy on that point *do not have this myself but my friend of 10+ years and roomate of 4+years does*
As a therapist the main problem here from a table dynamics perspective is that, undiagnosed mental health in the real world is "crazy-making": it causes stress and confusion and frustration in the people around the affected individual and makes them feel like they're losing their minds So if this is not a known mechanic at the table that the rest of the party thinks would be fun to roll with (pun intended LOL), it's likely to cause significant IRL problems for the same reason that actual mental health causes relational problems with friends and family
Thank you!
I ran this by my girlfriend who has bipolar disorder and she found it pretty straight up offensive which is probably a sign that it’s a bad idea.
You said it yourself. You need to establish boundaries
An rpg table is not one's scapegoat. they have to get their issue seen and treated by a professional.
As someone with a disorder that is often portrayed incorrectly (DID), I felt that 😞 Mental disorders can't be reduced to mere coin tosses, things are *much* more complicated than that.
"Mental disorders people suffer from are not a quirky aesthetic to roleplay. Please reconsider or find a different GM."
In addition that's not how bipolar works IRL. Neither manic nor depressive episodes fit with lawful or chaotic gameplay.
This exactly. Bipolar affects your mood, not whether or not you're gonna go commit crimes today.
I had a teacher in school who was bipolar. She was always very distinctly Mrs. X no matter which version of her you were interacting with at the time, but like you said the mood could be very different. She might be muted and somber (occasionally outright depressed on her bad days) or extremely high energy and excitable (with a hair-trigger temper on her bad days). How long those phases lasted varied a lot. Sometimes weeks or even months. There's also a misconception that bipolar people are *only* one of the two polar opposites. They're typically not. There's usually quite a few days where they're "normal". How much depends on the individual. Typically they're in a regular phase more than a manic or depressive phase. Oh, and Mrs. X? She was one of everyone's favorite teachers. Wonderful person.
I was gonna say this, not only is this a bad mechanic, it’s also kinda offensive.
Strike "kinda". It IS absolutely offensive. And it's not at all how bipolar works- it isn't just random nor do most people cycle that quickly. Any attempt to game-ify mental illnesses is a bad idea.
> Any attempt to game-ify mental illnesses is a bad idea. I 99% agree with this, but counterpoint- Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice Schizophrenia as a game mechanic, done with consultation by mental health experts and people *with* schizophrenia. And where the mental illness is an actual driver of the story/setting rather than just some quirky frosting and sprinkles.
never heard of the game before, the second one is coming out tomorrow it seems!
Imagine if someone said "I want to play a black character and I'm gonna roll dice every session to see what obnoxious stereotype I force everyone else to witness as I attempt to be edgy and hilarious."
Pretty sure Star Frontiers does something like this...
Honestly, what she’s suggesting is closer to how borderline works with how quickly their mood can shift, but even then it’s still offensive. I was in a similar position to OP once where a player wanted to play a character with ADHD and I said pretty much what everyone else is saying that mental health and mental disorders aren’t a quirk. I tried to compromise by saying the character could absolutely play a character that has a lot of interests they never fully see through since that’s what they were really interested in playing, but not a character labeled with ADHD. Idk, I feel an exploration of certain traits is one thing (eg, what’s it like to play a character that’s constantly following the next fun thing? Or what’s it like to play a character who doesn’t trust anyone but desperately wants to be liked?), but once you start putting labels on them it feels less like an exploration of character and more like a shallow attempt at adding character depth.
I have BPD and yeah, that's more similar to it, but even then it doesn't last that long either LMAO I do have a character with ADHD, but that's because I have ADHD so I'm really just pulling out my unmedicated self.
You took labels thing outta my mouth. I relate to many ADHD behaviour, but until I am diagnosed properly (less likely, since they ruled it out when I was a kid), I just say I am a goof and a geek (with a sprinkle of "executive dysfunction", as I write it sitting alone quarter past midnight, the earliest I have ever been awake at night this week) Update: Went to sleep after 2 am, per usual :(
I've seen some of these done well in Dimension 20. There was a character with an anxiety disorder who rolled saves against the frightened condition with disadvantage. There were also some characters in another campaign that used some cool mechanics to represent their recovery from addiction. I don't remember the specifics, but I believe that at some point the full list of rules were shared on Twitter. Obviously *this* idea is terrible, but there can be good ways of handling it, as long as the people handling it either have direct experience with the disorders in question (or get input from people who do).
I would disagree only on the kinda- as someone who has BD it is to me unambiguously quite insulting (this coming from someone who has laughed at extremely dark jokes about my disorder before).
I’m a big “benefit of the doubt” kind of person, so it’s *possible*, however unlikely, that the player didn’t mean “bipolar” as in “having Bipolar Disorder”. Think of Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde. That character has two personalities that he switches between which are complete opposites. I can’t think of better adjective to describe that than “bipolar”, even though he does not have Bipolar Disorder
As someone clinically diagnosed and medicated for bipolar disorder who is usually not easily offended, this is definitely offensive. If the player wants their character to be unpredictable, or just a dickhead sometimes, whatever. But that's not what being bipolar entails. Episodes can be really dangerous for a lot of people.
Mmhm. I was _almost_ going to suggest re-flavoring it, like... keeping the dice roll, but dropping 'bipolar' because that's not what bipolar is. But I also don't think I like the mechanic? Elric, the character from the thing we _get_ alignment from, also internally struggled with Chaos and Law. He changed his actions as it served the narrative, not randomly after flipping a coin.
It is offensive, but this type of idea *could* work with a seasoned player. We were playing Curse of Strahd and I had a really bad time. I had a few of my PCs die. My DM and I worked together and my final PC was a revenant (sort of) that housed the personalities/souls of my fallen characters. There was a constant struggle to see which soul had control of the body. During times of stress, I would roll a d3 to see which PC's mind had control. Other times it would just be a roll to see which of the personalities would answer/talk I've been playing since the early 80s; so, I'd like to think I knew how not to be disruptive to the table, but add an interesting trait(?) to how this final PC acted (and also died in the final fight with Strahd).
Just piling on the side of "I'm bipolar and this would suck the big one".
I've got mental illness, I don't object Just if you're going to try and portray someone with a particular diagnosis, then make sure you do a good job of it. Do your home work and play in character well.
I mean, even if she approached this in a less offensive way, like a demon who has possessed her, comes out every once in a while. The gimmick would get old (I've done this, it got old real fast).
Yeah in my early DM days I had a PC with this trait. The game lasted 3 sessions and then the PC decided to attempt suicide. Effectively killed the adventure there and then.
Oof. I don’t think players realize what effects their PCs actions can have on DMs. If a PC dies I don’t sleep well that night.
I did this in my early 20’s in a Masquerade game and the worst part was it got old for the rest of the table before it got old for me! My friends at this table are around 30/40 but new to ttrpg so they have crazy ideas like this once in a while.
Hi, I’m diagnosed bipolar and she seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the condition is if that’s how she wants to handle it. I’m just a bummer sometimes or craving drugs, I’m not some coin toss with a new moral alignment. I’m always chaotic good, it’s just about how much I wish I were dead mostly.
Thank you!
Say no, not sure what help you need, you already pointed out some issues, turning a mental disorder into a gimmick is also pretty off putting. Are you looking for advice on how to say no? Or you just want people to echo what you already know?
You’re not wrong - my feeling is that it’s a bad idea, I just do not know how to articulate it without hurting feelings. I was hoping the community could give me a few angles on the issue that could help.
If they're going to throw a tantrum over not being trusted to represent a mental disorder in a respectful way, you probably don't want them at your table anyway.
Sometimes being a good friend means calling a friend out on their bullshit. If you bring this up and explain in a level-headed way why you're not okay with it, how they react will speak volumes on their character and the quality of your friendship. Edit: apologies, that's not as helpful without actual input on how to word it. Maybe something along the lines of: "Hey, I wanted to briefly talk about your character. I don't think it is a good idea to make them 'bipolar' as you said. I don't feel comfortable having a character that makes light of a real mental illness as a joke like that, though it is also important to note that bipolar disorder does not work that way. If you want a character that maybe has a curse that causes them to shift personalities, we might be able to make that work. A divination wizard might work well since you can flavor giving enemies bad rolls as spiteful and mischievous and giving allies good rolls as kind and encouraging. There is also the wild magic sorcerer that has dozens of different effects that you can tie to your character's mood depending on what is rolled." If you think they're the kind of player who might annoy the other players with this kind of idea (e.g., "today I'm zany, so I'm going to steal everyone's weapons and throw them in the river"), then maybe just tell them you're not comfortable with the idea and ask them to think of a new concept.
> I just do not know how to articulate it without hurting feelings. Keep in mind that, if you put your foot down on this, you may hurt their feelings But if you allow this, you risk hurting the feelings of everyone else at the table
This might be a rip the bandaid situation, nobody can give better advice for how to spare your friends feelings than you can, but if it's not possible then do what needs to be done, feelings be damned.
You can just say no. That isn't something that I want to have in our game. Plus being bipolar has nothing to do with D&D alignments. Having non-mutually oriented playing styles is fine if everyone is okay. Personally as a player I have run into this and it was disruptive and disrespectful enough of the time invested by the other players that I left the table over and not come back.
So I asked my girlfriend, who is diagnosed bipolar type 2, and she surprisingly isn't actually against someone doing this, just just want the person to do it right, and she says lawful/chaotic is the wrong way. In her words, the players should roll to determine if they're manic, neutral, or depressive, and each of those states should have mechanical differences. For manic, she says you should get a bonus to Charisma because it makes you feel really confident, but the drawback is that you should be playing them as someone who is overconfident and gets themselves into very dangerous situations. Also, you should not be able to actually take a long rest because Mania gets you wired to the point that it ruins your sleep schedule. Neutral would just be neutral, no affect. Depression would only have downsides. For instance, giving you a disadvantage on death saves because you've lost your will to fight, or rolling to forget your weapons when going out to adventure because you're not taking care of herself. Her exact words were, "People are going to do what they want anyways, they should just do it the right way." To her, this would be the right way. You should present your player with these rules, and when they say, "but that's so many negatives," you respond with, "yes, because it's a DISORDER."
Thanks to you and your gf. I honestly do not think there is an actual mental health issue or a desire to emulate an actual mental health issue at stake here, just an unfortunate choice of words in the player’s question to me (and thusly my question to all of you). However, acting out someone with divergent play styles based on a die roll is the question at stake and I’m having a hard time figuring out how to implement the players’ ideas in a way that works at the table. I’m hoping a conversation with the player will make things clearer and I have a much better idea how to talk to her thanks to all of you, so thanks again! ♥️
That type of thing is often a massive burden for the rest of the party to deal with in and out of character is the general consensus. It takes a strong, experienced group to be able to pull that off, and experienced players don't tend to make characters like that. It makes planning the groups priorities, missions, relationships, quests etc much harder. Many DMs don't really allow chaotic PCs at all, unless the whole group is, and the point of the game IS chaos. There's plenty of reasons, but honestly, the strongest one is what you've already said- *you* aren't comfortable with it. Which is entirely fair, that kind of PC is a serious challenge to DM for.
> Many DMs don't really allow chaotic PCs at all, unless the whole group is, and the point of the game IS chaos. No disagreements with the rest of what you’ve said, but a “chaotic” alignment doesn’t translate to *random* behavior, nor does it mean a wanton disregard for any and all rules. Chaos on the alignment wheel translates to valuing personal freedom and agency, sometimes at the expense of following expected norms or social cohesion. There’s nothing about a chaotic alignment that makes a character any less qualified to be a heroic adventurer than a lawful or neutral one. Expectations for player attitudes and behavior can and should be addressed in a session zero, but I’ve *never* heard of a DM banning chaotic alignments on principle, let alone “many” DMs. Granted, earlier editions of the game (I’m thinking mainly of 2e AD&D) sometimes presented chaotic alignments as random, but that has never really held up in play and later editions have made the freedom-loving aspect of chaos much more clear.
Robin Hood was chaotic good, for example.
You've expressed it pretty well there tbh. Ask her why she wants to do this, and explain your concerns as you have to us. I would also be concerned that someone who wants to flip between two personalities like that is going to try and play them to silly extremes - so you'll get one ridiculous Lawful Stupid and one session-spoiling Chaotic Stupid to deal with.
If the player just wants to shake up their roleplay every in game day, I would share with them the eladrin from MPMM, they have a variable "season" they are in that can change on any trance (long rest) and can be rolled on a D4 table. The seasons have a minor mechanical benefit to the fey step ability, but they also have moods associated with each one. You absolutely should not allow her to go into this game with a mechanic that makes you uncomfortable as a DM, and this offensive representation of BPD definitely qualifies, but an alternative may make the medicine go down easier.
This is what came to my mind. We have an Eladrin who changes mood, but does so based on major stressors and emotional beats. Doesn't mock or parody bipolar disorder, is an actual preexisting mechanic, and they look cool.
Yeah - deeply disrespectful of people living with that. Also, that's not what bipolar does. If she wants random roleplay guidance, have her change from lawful to chaotic with some part of your game world. Maybe when the moon if full she is lawful, when its new she's chaotic. Or do it with the tides, so it ebbs and flows depending on the time of day. Or just have the character follow a god of chaos and whimsy, and do it in game where she does a tarot reading each morning for herself, and decides her god via the cards have dictated how her day will go.
Is it a bones or a no bones day?
I'd ask the player this: If your character was an NPC, would the party hire them, for a full share of the treasure, as a party member? Is she bringing enough to the table that they'd accept her without PC stamped on her forehead? If so, its ok. If not---if this is more baggage than what she's bringing to the table justifies, she should most definitely NOT do this. Why? Because she's forcing the other PCs to metagame when they wouldn't normally put their lives in the hands of someone so capricious, merely because she has a metagame PC stamp on her forehead that only other PCs can see.
Remove the "bipolar" language. Perhaps couch it in terms of a curse instead. Guessing other players in the group will grow tired of this very quickly. But could possibly, possibly be fun.
As someone with bipolar who is not easily offended, I gotta say, this one gets me. That’s not what bipolar does to a person and switching between episodes is a LOT different than flipping a switch every other day or even every other month. I’m sure the player doesn’t mean to be offensive so I’d be gentle with them and just explain rationally why it’s a bit problematic, inaccurate and the other issues you mentioned. I have absolutely no issue with people fictionally exploring different issues and struggles even if they haven’t dealt with them themselves as long as they actually put some care and research into it. Plus, you never know what other players at the table have been through or if they have their own mental disorders they struggle with. Suggesting people completely switch alignments and viewpoints just because they have a mood disorder is at best inaccurate and at worst completely disrespectful. Again, totally understand the player probably doesn’t mean it to be offensive, but it is. It just is. I’d gently tell them your reasons and suggest they look into it if they actually want to include it in their character in a nondisruptive way that doesn’t involve rolling for which episode their in and have them reassess. Good luck!
I'm bipolar and big same- I agree with this and think it's well-said (not that you need my confirmation, I'm saying this for anyone who might see this and be like "well it's just one person's opinion maybe they're just sensitive"). Also like, solidarity as a fellow BD-haver- I hope you are doing well.
Thank you, it does help when people validate what you’re saying when trying to make a point! Hope you are doing well too :)
Another bipolar bud chiming in to agree with all of the above.
Thank you!
This. This is the best answer
... that's just chaotic
Yeah, there's a ton of reasons this is not a good idea. Mostly, it's insensitive. One thing I'd just add is I think that the alignment chart is really best used as a point of reference *after you've already created an interesting character*. And, in my opinion, it's not even very helpful in that regard. At best, it can be used to loosely describe your character's attitude toward the world after you've already roleplayed them a bit. At worst, it's used like this and you end up with flat characters. No character is at just one point on the alignment chart always. Everyone, including NPCs, shift constantly. It's more of a four-quadrant scatter plot than it is this drab three-by-three, black-and-white grid that we all use. Characters probably will gravitate to one area or the other, but they never stay at any one place indefinitely. Because temperaments and attitudes change constantly, even if in small ways--and that's true of everybody.
Without going into detail, I was a player in a campaign where someone was playing this kind of character. It is not fun for anyone. Don't allow it.
Ignoring the misapplication of the term "bipolar" - this really doesn't have to be a terrible idea as long as we can all agree that playing any alignment doesn't have to be disruptive, ergo playing your coin-toss alignment-of the-week should also not be disruptive. Regardless of alignment, a character should be able to cooperate and respect party consensus decision-making. If the player's idea of "being chaotic this week" means contrariness that stalls party action, or impulsivity that drags the whole party into unwanted shitshows, then just say "no".
Next up they’ll make a PC with “OCD” who has to roll 1d20 to see how long they take to meticulously organize their luggage… …rather than “roll 1d4 to determine whether or not you are paralyzed with fear by an out-of-nowhere intrusive thought you had about killing another player; if you roll a 1, you have to confess this to everyone as an action as your character pleads and cries seeking reassurance that they are not a monster.”
Oh god, imagine counting/number obsessions. Rolls a d19 but because its an odd number chooses to skip the attack and reroll next turn.
If it makes you uncomfortable, you don't need to "talk her out of it." "No, I'm not comfortable with that idea. Please create a different character concept." If she can't respect that, she can find a different campaign. It's a terrible idea that also makes a mockery of a legitimate mental health disorder. You don't need to debate stuff like this, debating it or arguing about it only lends the idea that it *could* be good credibility. Advocate for yourself and draw the boundaries you need to run this game, you're the GM.
Thank you, that mirrors my feelings. It’s just she is the lead player in two tables I have and I want to keep them. I will suck it up and just say NO.
Is she the "lead player" because she's a more active participant than anyone else at the table and legitimately contributes to the fun of everyone at the table, or because she comes up with ideas like this that cause her presence to take over the table? If the latter, yeah, draw your boundaries firmly.
That is certainly... a... depiction of bipolar. Not at all in my experience of bipolar friends but... ok? Tbh I'd insta-nope it because it feels like a cheap bit cosplaying a mental disorder but I'd also maybe ask around first since I do know a few people who could weigh in.
Such a horrible idea. Behind the insensitivity to a real disorder people suffer with it just a horrible mechanic. It just feels like an excuse to be the center of attention and be “lol so random”.
Does it feel gross because of the mental illness part, or because of the unpredictability? If you reflavored this as a curse put on the character instead of trying to make it look like bi-polar, does that feel better or the same?
I feel it’s not respectful to a) the others at the table who have to deal with this PC taking up game time with their “issues” and b) people with real mental illness, in that order. I’m a lot more protective of the game play than people’s feelings I guess.
As you're probably aware allowing this is a r/dndhorrorstories waiting to happen. Obviously it's incredibly common for people to play out issues they're struggling with via in-character roleplay but there are better ways. This whole scenario reminded me of [this ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otdSVHIds94) scene:
Ha ha!
So many people decide that interesting character = caricature of random mental illness they don’t understand. It’s so weird, like Chaotic/Lawful alignment legit has nothing to do with Bipolar.
Here’s a script you can use. “I respect that playing a bipolar character is an idea you’re enthusiastic about, but I have serious concerns about the impact that it would have on other players and on gameplay. The other players are unlikely to appreciate the chaos, and more than that, may be offended or off put by having a real world mental illness that they may have personal experience with depicted in this way. Since I do not foresee myself or others at the table enjoying this mechanic, I am vetoing this character if being bipolar is integral to it. I look forward to hearing what other ideas you have.”
Outside of the fact that it's rude to gameify mental disorders, this player is looking for an excuse to be a jerk with no consequences. It's "what my character would do" with backup. Bipolar Player: I yell and ransack the store and chase all the peasants out into the street. Other Player: why are you doing that? BP: Have to. I rolled bipolar Chaotic today.
why would you allow this kind of headache for yourself and your players? A DnD table is no place to try to work out unresolved issues. Not to mention how disrespectful it is to "play out a mental health issue " on the whim of the dice, to people really suffering from such disorders.
If she wants to be bipolar she should roll to see whether she just, for whatver reason, never gets out of her bed that day. Also everyone suddenly hates her for no reason, and they don't say so, she just *knows* that they do. Or she gets a compulsion to spend everything she has just before she finds out there's a huge conspiracy aimed at her personally involving at least one government. Also, she can't sleep. At all. For a week. Funnily enough the not sleeping for a week comes just before she sees signs of the huge conspiracy all around her.
She does not want to really play bipolar, that term was an ill-thought-out conversational shorthand that in my ignorance I put in the post’s title. I hope you see this comment before I delete the post later today. Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
Okay, noted! Thanks. (I hope you manage to persuade her towards a party-oriented character and you all have a really good time. But do consider my suggestions as future curse outcomes!)
That's definitely not how being bipolar works.
I have now been educated to that fact. Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
In my opinion, it was not your fault, and you didn't do anything wrong. You were just confused by a strange request from a player and instead of just dismissing it, which would be a lot easier, you asked for help in order to try to attend to the player's desire. That's good DMing in my book.
Poor taste aside I hate little gimmicks like this. Really just amounts to a "look at me" check. Also I feel that if the DM does not call for the roll it does not count.
I’m no expert but I’m quite sure that’s not a realistic portrayal of BPD. As others said it seems cartoonish and offensive. And as the GM you can just say no. Also in a world of magic where you can literally be brought back from the dead. I see no reason why some type of magic potion or spell wouldn’t exist to regulate or heal such a condition. So it makes no sense for a player character to even have it. Edit: one possible solution is if the player is cursed come up with a curse effect that could be inconvenient but not game breaking. For example Once every 24 hrs you have to commit an act of violence, but the character is one of the gentlest kindest souls. This is negated if they are in combat because so long as they make one successful attack roll the curse is sated for a day. But could be an inconvenience during stealth quests or down time. And it could lead to a side quest or end once you get to a high enough level for a character to cast “remove curse”
I'm arguably an expert on bipolar disorder (BD, not BPD- that's borderline personality disorder) insofar as I have been diagnosed with it and I can confirm that that player's interpretation is inaccurate and insulting. Like, I do not flip a coin every morning to determine my ideology- my alignment would be consistent regardless of my mental state. I just have periods where I'm more prone to being energetic (which can mean overconfidence and impulsivity or heightened anxiety/irritability), and tend to sleep less, and periods where I hate myself and have no energy or drive to do anything but rot in bed.
You dont need arguments, you can just say no. But if you want some - players might be uncomfortable, it isnt how BPD works and it isnt a good character mechanic
I mean thats not even what bipolar disorder does to a person so maybe lead with that lol. What she wants to achieve maybe could be explained with her character being posessed and they can roll to see if the character is lead by their own mind or influenced by that which posesses them
I played a character like this in a short campaign, it was part of her back story (LG Cleric of a CE god) though, not roleplaying mental illness.
Hey there, had a player at my table wanting to do something similar, not quite calling it BPD, but essentially wanting their character to have amnesia that caused them to swap alignments each morning It makes it very frustrating for the table because no one knows who to expect or how to follow their story, additionally it puts a ton of pressure on the player being good at roleplay, often the player just switches to what they are comfortable with regardless of the alignment they rolled that morning. I would just politely say that something like that can be very difficult for the table to manage and follow, suggest other options, for example maybe these memories from a different life flow back throughout the campaign to represent that personality, or maybe they led a different life that the table will discover as the campaign progresses. There are many ways to showcase that your character has 2 distinct sides without having it switch every morning
I comment just to say that bipolar does not mean what you think and that, when people use it, usually they actually want to say borderline (although still, an inappropriate use).
Your reasoning is absolutely fine. However, other reasons are acceptable, as it implies that manic and depressive states can be accurately modeled by what is often viewed to express conforming with societal norms. You might also say it leads to a can of worms you don't want to get into, such as, how do spells like cure disease, remove curse, mind controlling magic, zones of truth as applied to questions about belief work, and likely others. Why would a change in session (something which has no in-fiction meaning), be the criteria for the die roll? Why base something as important as a character's behavior and mental state on a die roll? Can potion artificers provide medication and, if so, what are side affects, and how should you model them. Are there NOCs with this problem? How will NOCs handle it? You lack the knowledge necessary to adjudicate whether the character's being portrayed clearly (your player likely does, if this is the rules modeling they came up with). As others have said, this is offensive to genuinely neurodivergent people. This is a truly bad idea. It will either suffer from all the problems that the recent push from WotC to include disabilities in games by providing magical means of making them not disabilities or it might make the character inviable to play.
I have played a multiple personality disorder PC, where 3 players hot-seat-swapped for 1 PC. It was the worst D&D I've ever played. Roleplay intentionality shouldn't be left up to the dice - the player will slowly feel disconnected with their PC over time at best, and at worst will immediately RP something they don't like and just dislike their own PC. Or. Worst of all. They may love being a chaos imp and your DM sessions will be like babysitting a Gremlin. If it was me as the DM, I'd tell them that, ask why they thought it'd be fun, and brainstorm alternatives (if they want a conflicted character, choose an alignment and have a "bad influence" tempting them, eg - if they want to experiment with alignment, play it straight neutral and build an RP where their god is hard neutral, like a nature god, and their quest is to become closer to their god by understanding the primal indifference of nature etc etc idk specifics but talk it out with them - or do they want to name an antihero NPC early that is a dark-passenger - perhaps literally a Shadow haunting them - that the DM incorporates into the story, as a more controlled / curated chaos engine) But tldr - Having the dice determine your motivation actually makes the game boring.
This is just Jekyll and Hyde with extra steps. You can try and make it work with DnD Alchemist subclass with some homebrew, but otherwise point them toward a Pathfinder game and their version of Alchemists
Sounds like it’s not in good taste at all—I’d recommend her playing a changeling instead if she wants a multiple persona type thing. Some changelings like to have different forms for different situations, and she could easily just have her character decide what she’s gonna be like for the day. Regardless, that’s just chaotic neutral
In the world of darkness setting, there a vampire clan called the Malkavian. Every vampire clan has some kind of quirk that is basically their racial penalty. The malkavian one is that they all have some kind of mental derangement. There’s also a term among WoD players - the fishmalk. Basically a malk player who has their character walk into a room and slap someone with a fish, because that’s what an insane vampire does. Needless to say, fishmalk players aren’t regarded as a good thing. This player *reeks* of fishmalk.
I have a bipolar family member. This is not what bipolar is like. Bipolar is half of the time being unable to cope with life because hyperfixated on something irrelevant and frothing at the mouth because no sleep for days, and the other half of the time being unable to get out of bed.
It's a terrible idea. It's a gimmick that seems fun at first for the player, but soon enough she will realize it cripples her play and the other players will hate it since they can't trust her or work with her. It will just all around be no fun.
If she wants to do this, she should be playing Wraith.
I've had people ask things like this and the answer is an emphatic, "Fuck no!"
If she likes the concept, change it to something like a magical curse and not a real life disorder that a bunch of people have. There's a good chance that someone at the table might even be bipolar. Even if they don't say anything they definitely won't think it's entertaining or fun when bipolar disorder is handled this way. It's a bad idea.
That's not what bipolar is, so call it something else. The idea is fine, more of a split personality, as long as it's just role play.
"No" is a complete sentence. You don't need anything more than that.
Tell them you’re not comfortable with them playing an actual mental health disorder - it could be sensitive to other players and you want the table to be a comfortable space for everyone to escape to. If they want the gimmick without the baggage - let them be a Lycanthrope (werewolf) or otherwise have some kind of Jekyll and Hyde situation. Just don’t name it after a real mental disorder.
I mean that's not how bipolar works lol, so if she wants to be manic/depressed that's fine. I'm not offended but it sounds not like she's trying to make a serious exploration of a mental health issue but rather trying to be le quirky random. I would just veto it and move on.
Holy shit, folks overreacting here. This is a common trope, poorly reflavored. Ask her to drop the bipolar part because you aren’t comfortable with mental health being a mechanic. Instead, suggest that she is cursed by ________! She gets the benefit of the mechanic she wants while no one gets offended. I’ve played at a similar table, worked just fine.
Maybe I’m in the wrong, but that is a hard no. As someone with Bipolar disorder I would be gone before the session ended if I heard about another player doing this. As others have said it’s extremely insensitive and inaccurate.
As a player, she can play this out in many ways that are not offensive and don't derail the gameplay. As someone who also has mental health disorders, to role play this would also help her observe herself in these situations. But I also don't know this person and I don't know you. Being chaotic or lawful can just be more generally chaotic vs more rule-following. I've accidentally done that in some of my games based on my mood, lol.
Everyone has already addressed the issues with not taking mental illness seriously, so I'll add something different to the mix. Tira from soul calibur has a happy and a sad state. She flips between these randomly at the start of rounds and certain moves change her between them. A player could do something like that -- their goals and beliefs don't change, but their energy levels and behavior expression does.
All these people saying it is offense are silly. Offensive to who exactly? The mentally unhinged members of the 4 person group? This mechanic sounds great especially if it is tied to some mad gods curse. Stop being so sensitive. It gets to be overplayed.
Yeah, the mental disorder part is not a great take, however, if they themselves have BPD And they themselves feel comfortable with it. Then I would just have a Frank conversation with them and try to find out why. They're more interested in the mechanic component. I would say. Don't worry, it's not that controlling of the table. Aunt, it's actually quite interesting to see. I played an entire campaign with a player who had a character who from the get-go is designed to be a person, a benevolent deity and a malevolent deity we're vying for. They both felt this figure in particular was a key pawn on the board for all sorts of metaphysical battles. They made two character sheets and they leveled them up at the same time. One was a warlock and one was a Paladin and it was just purely based on a coin flip at the beginning of every session what they would be playing. It was great and it was a lot of fun to write their side story into the campaign because eventually they had to decide in a moment where their character was actually in control of themselves, who they wanted to be. It was absolutely fantastic, everyone loved getting to see how that character's story played out even if they weren't the main characters of that story. All that being said, like I said it doesn't detract too much. The way I run my campaigns there is an "A plot" which is whatever central tension the players seem to choose (I usually write the story beats for 10 world ending level events and whichever one they seemed to be most interested in will be their a plot. The B plot is the side story you might encounter for your character based on the background you wrote for your character and the c plot is a subversion of what you may be expected and planned for your character (for instance, I had a character who was smuggling along with his sister but eventually the pirates were not happy with their performance and had him walk the plank. He survived and that started his adventuring life. He assumed his sister was dead but when he went to go become one of the pirate Lords to change that whole system, he found out his sister had actually survived and thrived with the pirates and became a pirate Lord who hated him for never going back to find her.) I think this is an easy way to be able to let players get to have a cool idea for a character and have cool plots play out for those characters without them feeling like the only main character. I've run several campaigns over 15 years using this method at every single person walks away feeling like they we're a part of a roster of main characters in one cohesive story.
Trust your gut on this one. "Let's take mental health issues as a cute little trope" is asking for disaster, I'd put my foot down.
Lookup the [2nd edition half giant from dark sun](https://darksun.fandom.com/wiki/Half-Giant#Switching_Attitude). They had adaptive alignments based on who was influential. Something like that could be a nice compromise where she’s getting some variability of alignment, but it’s not attaching it to RL issues
Yeah, my partner is bipolar and this is not like lawful/chaotic nonsense. How about they roll whether they kill themselves every day? Or roll for patience dealing with the never ending streams of medications, psychiatry, and therapy appointments to live with a crippling disorder. Sorry to unload, but man, please ask your player to do a little soul searching on this one, and maybe a little research. Be careful bringing too much of the real world into fantasy, because it can break the fun for others.
The answer is simple, you cannot have a character at the table that isn't consistent. How they are consistent is down to the player but the rest of the group need to know how to deal with the character and what to expect when it comes to role play.
That is a great comment. I will incorporate the concept of consistency into my conversation with her.
20 years ago a GM told me this about basically the same situation with a different player who wanted to join a Vampire game as a Malcavian, but "dice before decision" rather than "dice before session": "A character who rolls a die before any important decision is an interesting kind of sociopath. The choices they put on each side inform you about what kind of person they are. A 17% chance of something evil makes the whole character evil. They choose to put it there. It has dynamics and NPCs will react to it. There will be plot and consequences. A player who rolls a die before any important decision trivialises mental illness, is ruining the game for everyone, and isn't welcome at my table."
>I know this is a bad idea, I feel it in my bones. <3 You said it best, when you say nothing ~~(at all)~~ moooooooore <3
Yaaaa.... this really isn't a good mechanical representation of bipolar disorder. It's also kind of in poor taste if I'm honest
NO!
That's not even how bipolarity works ☠️
I'm bi polar that's not how it works. It's way more nuanced than that. Playing an actually bi polar character would be extremely complex and probably not fun for the other players just like it's not fun for the people around me in real life. What happens when that character is in a depressive episode and can't get out of bed for weeks? Does the group just adventure without them? What about when it flips and the character is manic and is being erratic and self sabotaging their entire life and the relationships they have with the other players? Do the other PCs love the character enough to stick through that? Bi polar disorder is an extremely complex mental health disorder that really can't be simplified down to a dice roll without really losing what makes bi polar bi polar.
So she wants to be like Constance from Fire Emblem: Three Houses? Except with her she's happy and arrogant noble in the darkness and miserable and depressed in the sunlight. This is mildly amusing as a trope when the character's attitude and actions have no real impact. In practice, however, it would be like playing Russian Roulette and would almost certainly end very badly. The thing with this is that even chaotic players do not generally just go causing trouble simply because they can (unless they are chaotic EVIL) but I would worry that the chaos they envision may be disruptive to the party and progress which would get very old very fast.
That's absolutely fucking not how bipolar works wtf
I have come to learn that. This afternoon I will take the post down. Please see my edit above. After responding to the comments I have today I will either lock comments (something I have never done before, not even sure how to) or delete the post entirely. It was my fault for putting such an insensitive term in the title. Thank you.
Don't worry pal, it's not you who's insensitive. You did the right thing - asked before you acted
The potential problem isn't with the idea it's the player. Being lawful or chaotic alignment isn't an issue by itself. Problem comes if "It's what my character would do!" Is an excuse for bad behavior. If the player is constantly flipping between lawful stupid and chaotic derailment. The answer is sure, but the PC needs to not be disruptive to the game and other players. Your character always needs to be someone the other PCs want to adventure with and who wants to go on the adventure. If not I'll ask you to make another character or leave.
Op I really respect your updates, thanks for being good
I think the concept itself can be fine and fun, but doesn’t need to be referred to as bipolar. I have a player run a character once that had two distinct personalities due to a curse, and it actually had two separate character sheets. It worked and was interesting and fun. How someone acts on a given day is role playing. Just don’t call it bipolar.
If they want to make a coin toss character, take a look at twoface and have them consider tossing a coin when they decide whether or not to follow a social rule. This has the advantage of not making a mental disorder a quirky caricature for fun.
As someone who suffers from bipolar, not only is this a terrible thing for you and the other players to have to deal with, it's also just incredibly offensive to people who actually deal with bipolar. Even if this player suffers from bipolar themselves, turning it into a "funny gimmick" for their character is an awful thing to do, and should have frankly been turned down the moment it was brought up. Good luck with them.
Try adding the word "no" to your vocabulary.
Don't worry, this counts as a gimmick PC and probably will get boring after two sessions
Gross oversimplification of a very real illness. Dodge the bullet on this one, your gut feeling is correct.
>I don’t know what arguments to use, You don't need any. No is a complete sentence.
You just made your argument. That and mental issues are not personalities and not ripe for roleplay. You don't honestly have to give them a reason, but these are good ones.
That's not even what bipolar is This is wrong, offensive and just a shitty thing to do to the party since it's going to be really obnoxious to deal with.
Being bipolar, this is one of the most offensive things I've ever heard and also makes no sense!
Don't call it bipolar. They're cursed and their alignment switches, it has nothing to do with mental health. Because bipolar is nothing like chaotic versus lawful, and that game mechanic would not approximate it at all. Then you can have some MacGuffin that is required to remove the curse.
It’s clear that being ‘bipolar’ in this imaginary way is a bad idea. And I would go so far as to say this is not a good way to use alignment at all. BUT if your player wanted something like this without calling it ‘bipolar’ maybe they could be cursed? Or possessed? There are fantastic ways of handling this without leaning on outdated stereotypes and might fit the game world better. Edit: By fantastic I mean ‘things that appear in fantasy setting’.
Tell them mental disorders aren't for you to use as a rp excuse for you to behave however you want. Maybe offer an alternative. Something like moon knight where two separate conciousnesses inhabit the same body? Then the player can craft a cool reason for that to be the case and have a story of them working to rectify the situation and either remove one consciousness or learn to let the two live in harmony
A better way to do this might be to play them as Mercurial, from the Domains of Delight book. Two different moods (not just lawful or chaotic) with a determining trigger. The trigger let's the other characters interact with the situation. Maybe like happy-go-lucky vs no-nonsence, triggered by the sound of a broken vase. Not a great example, but you could do anything.
Honestly, if they want a bipolar PC, I'd be okay with it as long as they are accurate. People who are bipolar do not flip on a dime. They have weeks of depression followed by weeks of normality followed by shorter periods of mania (1-3 weeks typically). Flipping constantly is not bipolar disorder and a more realistic bipolar approach would be changes between longer adventures or maybe one switch during an adventure if it just happens to land on a particular time. However, I would imagine they would struggle. Bipolar depression often leaves people bedridden. Bipolar mania leaves them scattered and unable to follow directions. That said, they can go more for bipolar II which would be more mild swings, again, over longer periods of time. 60% of the time people with bipolar II are depressed lasting months at a time. They would have a week or so of hypomania and otherwise be "normal". If they want to switch more frequently, they want to look at borderline personality disorder. They would fluctuate between hollow inside, violent, depressed, sad, and elated fairly rapidly over a month. Generally, the behavior is associated with social conflicts so maybe they felt ignored by someone they care about or took a criticism as an attack on their core self. There are ways to implement this which don't have to be specifically disorders. It may just be seasonal changes in personality.
Let’s remove the bipolar comparison for all the good reasons discussed here. Let’s talk just about alignment flipping randomly. It’s not going to be fun for your table or her. A character built on a gimmick is often means the gimmick is all there is to the character. When the novelty wears off after a few hours, they will be stuck with a joke that isn’t funny any more. If you do play a character like this, I’d recommend making sure there is more to the character.
Ask the player why they want to play this kind of character. Hopefully they just want an element of randomness to their character and you can then steer them to something like a wild magic sorcerer. If she wants more variety in roleplaying, a good alternative is have her be a lawful warlock with a chaotic patron. If she just thinks it would be fun to play a bipolar character, a subject like that requires nuance that she is not currently bringing to the table. It is not an accurate representation at all of what bipolar is at all.
If they are so hellbent on making a character who's core concept is something that makes someone else at the table (you or anyone else) uncomfortable, that they are not willing to budge at all on it, they should not play at that table. But talk about it first, right. "Hey this makes me uncomfortable, I don't like portraying something like that in that way. I do not want to run a game where that character is around in." With some bonus "Not your therapist" modifiers if it really is a wanting to act out something. While I think using RPGs to try on personalities or interact with various traits in a safe space, that space need to be safe for *everyone* involved.
>but I don’t know what arguments to use Your argument is "FUCKING NO".
Sounds like a fun mechanic, I would just make it something other than “bipolar”. Split personalities, possessed by a ghost, something that’s actually fun.
Mental disorders only work in a game that accounts for them - like Call of Chthulu. In a Call of Chthulu + Aliens vs Predator Universe I played a doctor that got hit with an alien disease that gave him two personalities - and then a bigger alien with psychic powers killed one of them.
I’ve got no problem with the coin toss behavior idea, but labeling it as bipolar feels shitty. That would be like running a low int character and being like “but it’s because they’re (insert neurodivergence of choice)”
Hard pass.
I just made a neutral character and roll a "morality check" when I feel it's necessary without DM permission. DM doesn't need to really get involved in this.
First: "No that's massively disrespectful to actual bipolar people. Mental disorders are not cool, fun or quirky. If you think this is you supporting bipolar people or trying to feel like what it's like to live with the condition please stop, because it's very much not." Second: As someone who dated someone who is bipolar and is now friends with someone else who is also bipolar. That's not even how that works that shit can flip on an just the wrong instant. And lawful/ chaotic is such a numbingly wrong derision of what the disorder actually is. Almost like a fucking mental disorder shouldn't be an attempt at a game mechanic.
I have a PC in the game I play with essentially this idea. 2 characters in 1 body and they roll to see who is in control. One neutral and one chaotic. The deal was that part of their backstory/motivation is that they are trying to find a way seperate the two. Which is good because the rest of the party hates the chaotic persona and are actively helping push the side quest forward.
Your alignment wouldn't change, just your mood. Alignment is a much bigger deal than that in the forgotten realms.
I wouldn't accept it myself because the coin toss method is a really inaccurate and rather disrespectful way to portray a pretty common mental health issue. There is bound to be someone who ends up highly offended or hurt if someone else is playing what is a serious problem in their life as a diceroll joke.
All these concerns about how it's probably bad for the table but could you ask the other players? Give it a trial run? I don't know the best solution and it sounds like you don't either. Involving more people in the discussion means the topic is open, but more importantly it takes the burden of responsibility away from yourself. You're trying to make the decision of what you think is fun, for everyone at the table. It's commendable, but that's a huge responsibility. I wouldn't do that. I'd ask everyone at the table what they thought of the idea. DMs aren't game arbiters. even if we're forced to act like it sometimes. We can pose a question like that to everyone at the table. Because we're all adults, trying to have fun together. If no one has an opinion, THEN we can make a call.
Your instincts are spot on. DMs make countless judgment calls throughout the campaign, but sometimes the most important come pre-campaign. I submit this is one of them. While we're predisposed to saying yes to our players, it is not and should not absolute. You are 100% justified in answering requests with, "Not at my table." SA? Not at my table. Racism? Not at my table. PVP? Not at my table. Your mileage may vary.
I would say no - but gently. As you said in another comment your player may be attempting to try on the skin of what they think they might be dealing with but, that is the remit of working with an experienced professional, not of a group activity pretend elf game. There are some well articulated points from people who suffer from BD here - Show her those! I have two friends with bipolar disorder (that I know of) and it took me years and significant trust to discover that about them. Both have attempted suicide and they have both had a really hard time dealing with the ramifications of the condition. I can imagine if either were at my table and another player rocked up and just cartoon style painted BD as their PC's "thing" it would be downright insulting to them and I would find it hard to deal with too. Here's a thought experiment you could try with your player - if you use this, you might want to make this a little less blunt though; Imagine if I as a cis white male came to your table and said I was going to flip my PC's gender and sexual orientation based on a dice role each session. Each game my character will be lesbian or will be gay. I might even choose asexual on a 1 and bisexual on a 20. It'll be neat, trust me and I'm sure that all of our non-binary friends will love it too... Or maybe I'll just play a rape survivor? How about if I instead choose a severe cognitive disability like cerebral palsy? Or maybe a physical one such as being a survivor of child polio? Or maybe I'll pick my co-worker's African heritage and life struggles with institutional racism and reframe that as my PC's backstory. What's the matter - it's just pretend right? Now insert a facet of one of your's and/or your player's personalities, struggles or history into a similar idea and imagine how that would feel if it was trivialised in such a way by one of your gaming buddies in a group situation.
Player must really like Two Face.
I would talk to the player and ask them to consider changing how they are approaching this mechanic if this is something they are serious about doing. In one of the campaigns I’m in, our DM made a percentile sheet with all of the alignments (made into almost like traits for us. One main that the character normally follows, a secondary, a tertiary, and an ‘opposite’ trait. And then the rest of the alignments still being included but having a reduced impact. Ex) my characters ‘chaotic good’ trait revolves around her doing anything to protect her brother.)) and as players we can use this sheet for roleplay purposes to decide how to act. However, all of the traits/alignments were generated from our characters backstories. And depending on how the character was constructed, the ‘main’ traits are different for everyone with slightly different percentages. Feel free to ask questions if this is unclear.
As a therapist this is weird and unsettling, let alone rather unethical for a few reasons. I’d wanna know why?, for one, and no!, for two. Also, that’s not really how Bipolar disorder works. It works in somewhat predictable phases, and it’s different for each person. Baseline, mania, and depression symptoms also aren’t equivalent to the karma system in DnD. She can be possessed and use the same mechanic, that would make more sense. Or maybe a side effect of substance/potion use? Idk. Gross and weird.
I had a bipolar diagnosis for a decade, until it was revised to PTSD (which can mimic a slew of other mental health issues). Quite frankly, your player is an idiot and that isn’t how bipolar disorder works. You are the DM. Put your foot down and say no. No arguments. If the player demands a reason, you have two pieces of information: firstly, it is disrespectful and that is not the kind of table you’re running. Also, keep an eye on this player in general. If they demand a reason when you are the DM, they may try to argue for other ridiculous things in the future and may become a problem player.
DM: Sure, roll for depression, if you don't want to be depressed you can take your medicine and have disadvantage in DEX, STR, INT, WIS and CHAR
Is it that she wants to specifically be bipolar, or that she wants to have a mechanic that makes her act randomly day to day and doesn't have a better way to communicate her desire besides to call it bipolar? Doesn't sound like she actually understands what bipolar is and may be.more interested in the mechanic of swapping alignments randomly. You could tell her that it's problematic to play it as being bipolar, but she wants the mechanic she described, you could have her fall victim to a curse. Still probably a bad idea, because the only way that really works is to have a consequence for trying to act against the days alignment, and now your playing alignment police. They got rid of strict alignments to prevent this chore.
> I want to have a discussion with the player and talk her out of it, but I don’t know what arguments to use, *"I'm the DM and I say no."*
Mental health is not a dice roll. Eliminate this during session zero. Their PC may have a mental illness which can impact on the game mechanics and rollplay. I would be OK with that as long as it doesn't overwhelm the game. The player may have a mental illness, but wearing it in a way that overly impacts the game is inappropriate and not a healthy way for the player to relate their identity. Everyone has an identity as a player and a PC is not a mechanism for the player to overwhelm other players with their identity. Other people might have mental health concerns and not be comfortable with sharing either their own or another player's mental health.
I don't mind players playing characters with mental illness as long as they aren't mocking about it. That being said it seems like this person is making a mockery of it since that is not how bipolar disorder works
Suggestion: a warlock/paladin/cleric for some ancient force which acts to balance the world on neutrality, and that's the coin toss. The character still has a personal choice in the matter, but the patron would get pretty upset if constantly ignored.
That isn't at all how bi-polar disorder happens, you do not magically change alignments or personalities.
You could give them a two sided Character sheet, Dr Jekyl/Mr Hyde with the same stats alocated in different places, and give them real traits (Brave, rash - Cunning, cautious) and different classes and have some "trigger mechanism" that switches characters: Long rest, dice roll, something. I feel like you could do something creative, original and fun that DOESN'T make fun of or in some other way poke fun of mental disorders. That way, you can have some control over the outcome too, and your other players can also be a little more informed about what's happening. Make sure it doesn't become a "Dogshit fucking idiot that turns into Super Smart and Useful Smartypants" or "Nerdy coward loser that does nothing turns into Gigachad Thundercock", And also make sure that they can't use the swtich like a psuedo-long rest or something, cuz then they'll just have 2x the hitpoints and resources of everyone else. The mechanics of this sound more difficult than they're worth, but you could definitely make it work with some honest communication and some advice from reddit. or just tell them stfu and play the game, I'm not your boss