I like making characters for simple games, like BFRPG or Star Frontiers. I despise making characters when it's complicated like in games like 3e or Traveller.

Quote from: One Horse Town;541620Well, it depends if you think of pre-gens as ready-to-go characters or as a set class/occupation/whatever, with pre-set skill values that you customise as your character gains experience (Talislanta also gives you pre-set stat values that you can adjust slightly).

I've always thought both were templates, pregens make me think of one shots or con games.

Quote from: jadrax;541629I must admit, that is not the impression I got.

Busted.

I'm not one of those types who write novellas about my characters before the game begins, but I like to know who he is. Sometimes it's three paragraphs, other characters get three pages. For games with complex character generation, background material is extremely useful for making all those fiddly little decisions that tend to bog down the process: the choice of attributes, skills, feats, etc. should ideally be informed by the character's background as much as what's "optimal" in any given game system.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541640Busted.

I am not trying to trip Black Vulmea up or score points here.

I am just curious how quite a strong statement works in principle and if what I consider 'background' and what Black Vulmea considers 'background' are actually quite different things.

I wish he had realized this before starting design work on D&D 3. :-/

1. I used to love designing characters with point buy systems but now I enjoy short and sweet BX D&D level char gen with minimal back story. The switch started when I found making characters for 3.5 tedious and the very thought of making a GURPS character would make me fall asleep from boredom.

2. I don't think pre-gens are an answer to anything other than pickup games. To me it's a red flag if a system is so convoluted that it makes pre-gens or tweakable templates attractive or a necessity.

3. I'm sure there's all kinds of room to explore such things. Go for it. I'm a simple old creature that apparently imprinted on BX/Gamma World level complexity so I'll stick with that.

4. Character generation, by which I mean the process of determining the stats on your character sheet, should be fun or at least not a chore or homework problem. Traveller character creation (both classic and MGT) is fun to me.  If not fun then it should be quick. Having both is pure win.

Quote from: nezach;541644**snip**.

I have nothing to add other than to say that your avatar is my favorite episode of Twilight Zone.  Excellent taste.

Quote from: jadrax;541629I must admit, that is not the impression I got.

My character's backstory is that he was raised in Brignoles and moved to Marseille to make his fortune.

He has two goals, become an actor and make money off his sword.

So, I guess I allow myself a one-sentence backstory.

Quote from: jadrax;541643I am just curious how quite a strong statement works in principle and if what I consider 'background' and what Black Vulmea considers 'background' are actually quite different things.

La Planca's 'backstory' is a single sentence saying where he's from and where he's starting the campaign.

If you find that to be significantly different from just having a name, well, okay, then to you that's significantly different.

To put a finer point on it, I don't project conflicts into the campaign from my characters' backgrounds. There are no sworn enemies, no secret loyalties, no favors owed, no debts to repay, no reputation to live down, no friends in high places. I make that clear when I talk about Advantages and Secrets: "For this character, I decide to forego both an Advantage and a Secret, preferring to let these sort themselves out in actual play."

Remember, nothing that's written into a character's background actually happened, unless it was generated by a lifepath or similar system. It's all just fanwank and wish-listing. Having a sworn enemy that I made up whole-cloth before a single die hit the table isn't remotely as interesting to me as making an enemy in actual play.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541653To put a finer point on it, I don't project conflicts into the campaign from my characters' backgrounds. There are no sworn enemies, no secret loyalties, no favors owed, no debts to repay, no reputation to live down, no friends in high places. I make that clear when I talk about Advantages and Secrets: "For this character, I decide to forego both an Advantage and a Secret, preferring to let these sort themselves out in actual play."

Remember, nothing that's written into a character's background actually happened, unless it was generated by a lifepath or similar system. It's all just fanwank and wish-listing. Having a sworn enemy that I made up whole-cloth before a single die hit the table isn't remotely as interesting to me as making an enemy in actual play.

That's a pretty interesting perspective.

Do you find it limits what characters or even genres you enjoy? as an example, It seems to me you couldn't play a Batman style character as he is fundamentally driven by an event in his childhood?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541653La Planca's 'backstory' is a single sentence saying where he's from and where he's starting the campaign.

If you find that to be significantly different from just having a name, well, okay, then to you that's significantly different.

To put a finer point on it, I don't project conflicts into the campaign from my characters' backgrounds. There are no sworn enemies, no secret loyalties, no favors owed, no debts to repay, no reputation to live down, no friends in high places. I make that clear when I talk about Advantages and Secrets: "For this character, I decide to forego both an Advantage and a Secret, preferring to let these sort themselves out in actual play."

Remember, nothing that's written into a character's background actually happened, unless it was generated by a lifepath or similar system. It's all just fanwank and wish-listing. Having a sworn enemy that I made up whole-cloth before a single die hit the table isn't remotely as interesting to me as making an enemy in actual play.

I like that attitude.  As a GM it makes my life easy because I hate reading character bullshit that has shitall to do with the campaign. As a player fuck all of you frustrated writers, a short paragraph is plenty, I will develop her in game just like the casual gamer I am.

Quote from: jadrax;541656That's a pretty interesting perspective.

Do you find it limits what characters or even genres you enjoy? as an example, It seems to me you couldn't play a Batman style character as he is fundamentally driven by an event in his childhood?

Sure you could.

1. Parents killed in front of me when I was 6
2. Parents billionaires
3. I want revenge because the courts suck and law is turns a blind eye to justice
4. I'm a billionaire hmm.....

4 short sentences and I'm Batman.

Edit : Burgess Meridith "Last Man on Earth" iirc.  one of my favorites right after "In the eye of the Beholder" and the cooking humans cookbook episode.

Quote from: jadrax;541656Do you find it limits what characters or even genres you enjoy?

:huhsign:

Quote from: jadrax;541656. . . It seems to me you couldn't play a Batman style character as he is fundamentally driven by an event in his childhood?

I have zero interest in playing a Batman-style character.

Quote from: Marleycat;541658As a player fuck all of you frustrated writers, a short paragraph is plenty, I will develop her in game just like the casual gamer I am.

You have a seat at my table anytime you like.

Quote from: Benoist;541528So here are the questions: (1) do you like character generation yourself?, (2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens? (3) do you agree with Monte Cook there is more room for games which explore the concepts he's talking about there, with loads of pregens, choices of development not frontloaded at generation, etc? (4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

(1) Yes.

(2) No.

(3) Probably not.  I think that being able to play your own unique character is, in my opinion, a key attracting of the hobby.  So even rolling up some random attributes and making 2 or 3 choices (race, class, and alignment) is preferable, in my opinion, to any sort of pre-generated character.

(4) I wonder whether Monte Cook thinks about himself primarily as a player or GM.  I think of myself primarily as a player, and I think a lot of the things that many game designers assume players really want comes from them projecting their GM preferences on players who don't necessarily have the same preferences.

When I want a story, I sit my ass down and write one.  I game to be my guy, not to tell stories.  "I just came of age, left home with the tools of my trade and now seek my fame and fortune." is as much as I bother with anymore, by default, when I play.  As the GM, I will curate the milieu to get what I want as the PCs; e.g. if I'm wanting to hit those War Is Hell notes with monster and shit, I'll run RIFTS and keep the PCs at the Poor Bloody Infantry level by confining class choices to Coalition Grunt and Coalition Tech Specialist while running the campaign as Vietnam In Wisconsin or some similar shithole posting.