TheRPGSite

Monte Cook posted an interesting column today on his LJ:

"I hate character generation." (http://montecook.livejournal.com/253552.html)

So 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?

The answer is yes, except where it is no.

Heh.

I like it in some games - specifically where there's a good amount of randomization, and I get to "learn" things about the character I'm making (lifepath/career systems, for example, or just systems with a lot of random rolls).  On the other hand, point-buy games where the whole thing turns into an exercise in weighing advantage points vs drawback points - I'd sooner watch paint dry.  And in D&D (or similar games, where combat is a) deadly and b) frequent), character generation should just get out of the way and let me get my fighter to the table (which is where characterization ACTUALLY takes place).

I like character generation in my RPGs, and at this point there is a minimum amount of character generation required for me to play the game at all.

1) yes
2) no
3) yes, but I have no personal interest in those games
4) character generation during creation and character progression as the game unfolds both matter.

Quote from: Benoist;541528Monte Cook posted an interesting column today on his LJ:

"I hate character generation." (http://montecook.livejournal.com/253552.html)

So 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 who explore the concepts he's talking about there, with loads of pregens, no choices of development not frontloaded at generation, etc? (4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

Interesting post....

1) I love character generation I generally like it fast and simple but at the same time I love methods that have lifepaths like Burning Wheel, Traveller, Warhammer both Fantasy and 40k. I do agree with him that it's no fun to come in and say I want to be a Fighter or Rogue and be presented with a billion choices that are really no different. I want less choices but each very important. (I assume magic/psi using characters to require more complexity as a given). I also agree that frontloading is boring I prefer a more organic approach.

2)NO. But I like having pregens as a framework to work off like Star Wars.

3)Probably but not my style. I prefer a more backended approach.

4)Keep character generation to 30 minutes maximum (preferably less). I like something like Fantasy Craft for Dnd...pick a species, background, class and done. It does take the 30 minutes because it's a dense system and the books are not well laid out. 5e seems to be going for a similiar but less complex approach.:)

Quote from: Benoist;541528(1) do you like character generation yourself?

Yes, I absolutely love it and it's one of the best parts of the whole role-playing experience for me.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

Sure, but not now and forevermore.  Occasionally?  Sure, no problem.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(3) do you agree with Monte Cook there is more room for games who explore the concepts he's talking about there, with loads of pregens, no choices of development not frontloaded at generation, etc?

In a very limited and narrow sense, yes.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

The absolutely beauty and elegance of Point-Buy systems *is* the character generation, but, by the same token, it can be overwhelming since these types of games are tremendously front-loaded.

Yes, yes, yes, not really.

It really depends on the game.

for One-shots I almost exclusivekly prefer pregens. If it's an ongoing campaign usually we create characters.

Not really a fan of random-roll and point buy gets annoying if the system is too crunchy or fiddly (rolemaster, Hero, GURPs etc). Usually I use character modeling for my games...the player creates the character in descriptive terms, and then the GM goes in afterwords and assigns stats or defines the character in game terms.

As for Question #3), I have no idea if Monty Crook is correct. I don't think he's written a game yet that I've liked though, so I'm skeptical as to his views as to what makes for a fun RPG.


I should also note there are games where I ONLY like the character creation, as a sort of mini-game in and of itself. This includes The Burning Wheel, Traveller, and MSH (FASERIP)'s alternate chargen rules from The Ultimate Powers Guide. Everway's character creation was rather nice too, it's just unfortunate they never provided a real system to go with it.

I like quick char gen, but I like it.  One of the best things in an rpg for me is being able to visualize the type of character I want, and then play it.  So unless it's a REALLY BASIC game, I want character gen.

I thought this was worth re-posting and discussing.

Cook on Character Creation (http://montecook.livejournal.com/253552.html)

Character Creation

It took me a long, long time to sort of own up to it. It's a hard thing to admit, actually. But I hate character creation in rpgs.

I'm not a big fan of origin tales and the beginnings of stories anyway. I like to get right into the action. So I guess it shouldn't have surprised me that I was predisposed to dislike character creation. But there are other, more concrete reasons I don't like it, at least the way it is traditionally handled.

1. I don't like making decisions based on nothing. I don't like deciding that my character is this great diplomat before I even get a chance to see what the adventure or campaign is going to be like. Maybe it would have been better to devote myself to arcane knowledge or trapmaking. I don't know yet. And it's frustrating to have to decide ahead of time. It's like when someone invites you to one of those formal dinners where you have to choose from three entres ahead of time. I don't know what I'm going to want to eat some night four months from now. Similarly, I don't know what kinds of things I'm going to want to be doing three sessions from now. Or ten. Or whatever.

2. I don't like spending a lot of time making a lot of decisions at once. I remember, once, in a 3rd Edition game I was running, I introduced a new player to the game. After a lot of careful consideration, she decided she would play an elf rogue. At that point, I could tell that she felt like she was mostly done. So I could really feel her pain as I watched her face take on a look of horror as another player slid a pile of books, full of choices, at her. To the experienced player, the decision to be an elf rogue simply keyed to a number (dozens, really) of other choices she could now make. But she had thought she was mostly done. (I took her aside later, and advised her to ignore all those optional books and whatnot, and we made the character creation process as painless as possible.)

3. I don't like spending a lot of time on decisions that have little importance. It's kind of crazy, if you think about it, that the decision that my newbie friend had already made--race and class--were the "easy" choices, and then she had to go through and make a bunch of "harder" choices--skills, feats, weapon selection--that ultimately would affect her character a lot less. In other words, the choices that would define her most clearly were the ones that took the least time, and the ones that only barely mattered (should I put 2 points or 3 points into Move Silently) were far more laborious.

That's why any game I create from here on out will, if at all possible, feature the following:

1. Lots of pregenerated characters. When I got started in the rpg field twenty plus years ago, it was common wisdom that "real" gamers wanted to make their own charactesr, and thus hated pregens. Pretty much the only games that offered them were games for brand new players. It's sadly taken me a long time to shake that preconception. But I'm a real gamer, and I love pregens. If you're throwing together a new game this Friday, I'd much rather sit down with a stack of pregens to choose from than pull out my dice and a stack of books to create my own. Pretty much every time. If I don't know the system, this makes things go much faster. And if I do, even better because I then likely know how to make a couple of minor tweaks to the character to make it my own. Does this make me less creative? I don't think so. What it really means is, I get my joy from the game in different ways. It also means that I have created a gazillion characters over the years, and I don't need to have the experience of creating a haughty, scholarly guy (or any other cliche) or a sneaky dwarf (or any other goes-against-the-stereotype guy), or the paladin with a drinking problem (or any other character with "issues"). Those are all great characters, and I'd happily play any of them, but I've created them all already, so I don't need to do it again. Ideally, these characters would be either right in the core rulebook or available as free downloads.

2. Fast character generation options. There's great research out there that discusses how many choices people are comfortable with in a given situation, and the numbers are much smaller than pretty much any "mainstream" game's character gen system. I want to create a game where you can make three or four important decisions and have a cool character ready to go. Ideally, it would be configurable enough so that the people who do want a bazillion options, and want to tinker with every tiny aspect of their character can do so as well. And everyone in between can be happy too. To make this work properly, the affect of the choice should always be commensurate with the time and mental energy required to make it. In other words, if deciding between wookiee and blogon really is going to affect your character forever, there should be a lot to that choice. If the decision between the 4.5 crescent wrench and the 5.5 crescent wrench is not going to matter, then there shouldn't probably be a whole crescent wrench subsystem in the game.

3. Choices that are not entirely front loaded. A lot of people want to be able to shape their whole character to fit their character concept right out of the gate, I get that. But others don't want to have to make decisions way ahead of time. In real life, and even in (good) fiction, people change over time. They develop. I'd like to create a game that embraced that idea. Where not all your character defining choices had to be made before the first adventure even started. (When I was a kid, I had a friend who refused to name his character until he had played for a while, to get a "feel" for him. That's a bit silly and extreme, but the sentiment means a lot to me.) This would mean, potentially, that the game would grow as the characters grew. There might be rules that didn't come into play at the beginning of the game. Imagine (just as an example) a game where political affiliation--monarchist, populist, or anarchist--actually affected your character abilities. Now imagine that the game was set up so that you didn't have to make that choice until you'd played three or four sessions. The issues just wouldn't come up until then. Then, after you've got to know your character, you are presented with those choices, right when they are going to affect the flow of the game. That might be kind of cool, and possibly quite preferable to having to make those choices at the beginning, based on little or no information.

Sure, there are games out there that go down these avenues already. But I think there's room for further exploration.

If I can't make My Guy, then that game is shit and I want it to die screaming in a fire.

Someone might want to merge this with the existing thread.....

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541547If I can't make My Guy, then that game is shit and I want it to die screaming in a fire.

But HOW long do you give it before this happens? 10 minutes/20 minutes/1 hour/3 days?:)

Quote from: Marleycat;541549But HOW long do you give it before this happens? 10 minutes/20 minutes/1 hour/3 days?:)

Anymore, 5-10 minutes.  I have yet to find a game that can't be reduced to "Roll 3d6 in order, no Mulligans; pick race; pick class; roll cash and kit yourself."  The ones that insist that it has to take for-fucking-ever are also the ones where far more ruthless culling of shit options should take place (but did not).

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541555Anymore, 5-10 minutes.  I have yet to find a game that can't be reduced to "Roll 3d6 in order, no Mulligans; pick race; pick class; roll cash and kit yourself."  The ones that insist that it has to take for-fucking-ever are also the ones where far more ruthless culling of shit options should take place (but did not).

Cool, I give it 30 minutes and that's only because I can be indecisive about things. But I totally understand where you are coming from.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541555Anymore, 5-10 minutes.  I have yet to find a game that can't be reduced to "Roll 3d6 in order, no Mulligans; pick race; pick class; roll cash and kit yourself."  The ones that insist that it has to take for-fucking-ever are also the ones where far more ruthless culling of shit options should take place (but did not).

As deeply as I got into the chargen aspect of both 3E and 4E, I think they both went too far. I'm an addict, and I'll follow the system as far down as it goes. I once spent an entire week building a 12th level 3.5E Wizard from scratch. I'll take every bit of customization I can get, and there can't be too much for me, but I can realize its not necessarily good for the game as a whole.

I think a Star Wars Saga(core book) or World of Darkness level of character generation to be more or less ideal.

Quote from: Benoist;541528So here are the questions: (1) do you like character generation yourself?

I enjoy character creation. Just like I enjoy makng worlds as a Gm, as a player I like digging through the books, thinking about my character, and making it happen. It is also helpful toward learning the rules of the game.

Quote(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

Not really. This was my major issue with dragonlance when I first heard about it. Later you could make your own characters but if I remember the first modules were meant to be pregens. So my group avoided it initially. I might trust my own GM to make some pregens for me. That can be interesting once in a while. For the most part though, i would rather make my own characters.

Quote3 do you agree with Monte Cook there is more room for games who explore the concepts he's talking about there, with loads of pregens, no choices of development not frontloaded at generation, etc?

There is always room for different approaches. I imagine there are groups out there that will react favorably to these ideas. It doesn't really appeal to me though.

Quote(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

In the hands of a good Gm pregens can work great. I have been in some solid campaigns that relied on pregens signed by the GM. One good thing about them is they do force you to play a character you normally wouldn't. I just thik most players prefer to make their own characters.

I actually agree with most of what Monte said. I too, prefer to develop my character as the game progresses and dislike front-loaded choices. I, too, dislike fiddly and time-consuming character generation subsystems. (BTW, I think it's fucking rich to read this from the pen of Mr. Toughness Is Obviously A Trap Feat).

Even back in the day, I was bored to tears by Palladium's fiddlier character generation stuff. Sure, it's fun to pick your Borg's bionic implants, or your Ley Line Walker's spells, but jotting down each skill percentage (30% base, +4%/level, +7% IQ bonus, +15% OCC bonus, etc.) and sundry bonuses (+3 to roll with punch for being a Juicer, and another +2 from Hand to Hand: Expert, another +3 from Boxing and +2 from Acrobatics... and who the fuck remembers rolling with punches during combat anyway?).

Hell, the #1 thing keeping me off from running Eclipse Phase is the horribly fiddly character generation.

Also, GURPS.

Despite all this, though, I love creating a character. It's one of those opportunities that's so ripe with possibility... what will happen to this guy? Will he perish an ignonimious death, or rise to undreamed-of heights ofpower and glory? Champion a just cause, or sell himself to the highest bidder? etc. Pregens are expedient (and pretty much de rigueur in some situations, e.g. con games), but I do feel a bit robbed of something I enjoy when I'm handed one.

Also, some character generation schemes are games in and of itself. Some people on my group didn't like Traveller, but everyone had an absolute blast rolling up characters! One player went as far as saying that "chargen is more fun than the game itself." :eek: (mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa)

We just started a WFRP 2e game and again, everyone had a great time rolling up Jailers and Burghers. This time, they all agreed to leave EVERYTHING up to the dice, even when I gave them options.

So, I like character generation for what it is, and I like certain character generation subsystems even better (usually when there's randomness involved; makes the process feel more "gamey"). A good character generation system will tone down everything Monte is complaining about, even without randomness (Storyteller/Storytelling and Savage Worlds both spring to mind as non-random but straightforward character generation systems).

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;541561As deeply as I got into the chargen aspect of both 3E and 4E, I think they both went too far. I'm an addict, and I'll follow the system as far down as it goes. I once spent an entire week building a 12th level 3.5E Wizard from scratch. I'll take every bit of customization I can get, and there can't be too much for me, but I can realize its not necessarily good for the game as a whole.

I think a Star Wars Saga(core book) or World of Darkness level of character generation to be more or less ideal.

I had a friend like that, he drove me crazy talking about how he was building his character for like a week or two before the campaign, while I just waited to find out what WASN'T being played, roll it up and spend 30-60 minutes outfitting her and GO!

I hate pregens, but I don't like character generation. That is, I want to generate my own character but I want the process to be very fast, very simple, not require reading pages of skills/talents/perks/feats/whatever to be able to do so, and definitely not require balancing point costs or the like. A new player should be able to generate a good character in 5 or 10 minutes without any rules knowledge assuming the help of another player with basic knowledge of the system.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;541562This was my major issue with dragonlance when I first heard about it. Later you could make your own characters but if I remember the first modules were meant to be pregens. So my group avoided it initially.

Tangent and quibble (ignore freely :)):

The issue with the 1e AD&D DragonLance modules wasn't pregens per se, but it was the fact that the pregens were the established characters from the fiction which everyone had already read.  If the pregens were just random people from the setting and not the actual protagonists from the novels, then I think it would have been much easier to swallow from most people.

(1) do you like character generation yourself?

Generally no. I want to get on with it and play. Random rolled character generation if done right as with Icons can be a lot of fun and a create way to kick starts one's creativity but with complex, point based system system character generation mostly reminds me of filing a tax return and I find I lose the will to live long before I'm done.

(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

I like pregens, as long as it's just bare bone abilities pregens without a pre-determined background and personality. On the other hand a system that relied entirely on pregen would feel a bit claustrophobic as every time you go back to playing that system you are always looking at the same pool of characters.

(3) do you agree with Monte Cook there is more room for games who explore the concepts he's talking about there, with loads of pregens, no choices of development not frontloaded at generation, etc?

I do agree with his general points. I do find having to make a lot of choices mildly stressful and I certainly don't want to spend the best part of a session just getting characters sorted out. But I have no idea what there is room for in the industry.

(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

The main I find is that what makes a character interesting to me, his personality and mannerisms, aren't usually on the character sheet anyway so putting a lot of time and effort in character creations doesn't really pay off for me. And even in those systems where these are catered for my the system like Fate and Icons' Aspects I still prefer option rule that allows you to create these on the fly than trying to work in all out cold during a character generation session.

I just want to generate a character and play, not sit fiddling around building one.

Random is fine. I'll think about how the generated parts fit as play begins and the persona can interact with a world and actually have some context.

If I happen to fall into a pit trap and die before that happens then no effort is wasted. :D

Quote from: Marleycat;541565I had a friend like that, he drove me crazy talking about how he was building his character for like a week or two before the campaign, while I just waited to find out what WASN'T being played, roll it up and spend 30-60 minutes outfitting her and GO!

The week in question was more about writing out all the monsters I intended to summon or polymorph people into, and writing out the exact effects of every spell I had, and less about actual generation. I might have spent 6-8 hours generating the character with using the 3E CharOp forum as a reference. The extra time was spent allowing me to run that character from 12th-16th level without having to stop play to check the books.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;541572The week in question was more about writing out all the monsters I intended to summon or polymorph people into, and writing out the exact effects of every spell I had, and less about actual generation. I might have spent 6-8 hours generating the character with using the 3E CharOp forum as a reference. The extra time was spent allowing me to run that character from 12th-16th level without having to stop play to check the books.

Way too much investment for me. But hey different strokes and all that.:)

1) Yes
2) That would not be an RPG, it would be some other type of game
3) As long as I do not have to go anywhere near them I do not care
4) Character generation with a random component is often awesome

Quote from: jadrax;5415784) Character generation with a random component is often awesome

My tolerance for random character generation is inversely proportionate to the amount of time I'm going to spend playing that character.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;541580My tolerance for random character generation is inversely proportionate to the amount of time I'm going to spend playing that character.

This is why there needs to be adjustability dials in the game...playing a 1e style game? Random rolls all the way, playing 3/4e? Point buy all the way. Let each table decide because the eariler editions there was a far higher lethality level than the later iterations. And both are the baseline for that particular style.

Chargen is okay - lifepath systems are the most fun - but I can't stand games which front-load chardev; it's my biggest hangup with d20 games. If I can't play Gimli of Arabia (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=289653&postcount=280), then the system is making too many demands of me upfront.

I want chargen. I do not want to play a character that is not "mine."  

The "mine" is defined as having significant input the characters, goals, personality, and abilities.



However, I do find cons, and one shots may use pre-gens, and I'll accept that for the circumstances.

Then again, there is a reason I'm not a fan of most Japanese CRPG's--I can't make my own person. Unlike western RPG's where I usually can make personal choices for the character.

Just merged Mistwell's thread with this one.

Quote from: Benoist;541590Just merged Mistwell's thread with this one.

Thanks Ben.:)

But I hate character creation in rpgs.

Well then, you're kind of of up shit creek, Monte, because characters are what (good) RPGs are about.

I'm not a big fan of origin tales and the beginnings of stories anyway.

...without which your characters are going to suck.

1. I don't like making decisions based on nothing.

Obvious statement is obvious! Figure out what to base your decisions on before you make them. If you'd bothered to write an origin story (Oh, I forgot, you couldn't be bothered.) you'd have something to work with. Or if you'd take a few minutes to discuss what the rest of your group is playing, or what kind of campaign the GM is planning; he might appreciate it. And he's doing a hell of a lot more work than creating one fucking character.

The best character I ever played was a cooperative effort between myself and the GM, which he helped me complete after I wrote the back-story and he filled me in on the other characters already being played.

2. I don't like spending a lot of time making a lot of decisions at once.

Okay, this is fair. D&D 3E/4E are both way too "fiddly" and bloated by pointless options. Gurps, Hero, the list goes on. Character generation should be simpler all around.

3. I don't like spending a lot of time on decisions that have little importance.

Then don't waste your time on them. If you find you've made a serious mistake in a game with complicated chargen, a flexible GM will let you correct it. An inflexible GM should be avoided to begin with.


That's why any game I create from here on out will, if at all possible, feature the following:

1. Lots of pregenerated characters.

Those are called NPCs, Monte. If I can't create my own fucking character, I have exactly zero interest in buying/playing your RPG, and my interest in playing a pre-gen (unless I'm at a convention) is even less than zero.

2. Fast character generation options.

Now you're talking. I've been familiarizing myself with Savage Worlds lately; the ease and speed of chargen really impress me. If I can create a character in 20 or 30 minutes, that leaves more time for writing their background story, so I'd appreciate this.
 
3. Choices that are not entirely front loaded.

Just what the fuck does "front loaded" mean anyway? On my planet a front-loader is a piece of earth-moving equipment. Speak English, damn your eyes!


Screw this, I got work to do. RPGs don't design themselves.

I can't be arsed to read the thread, sorry - for the first time since i've been here, threads are starting to multiply quicker than i can read them.

I'll say this, though. If chargen is awesome, then i can safely say that the game will also be awesome.

Quote from: Benoist;541528Monte Cook posted an interesting column today on his LJ:

"I hate character generation." (http://montecook.livejournal.com/253552.html)

So 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) It depends on how much work it is.

2) No. I can't really see myself or anyone I have tended to game with enjoying that.

3) I suppose. Just not at my table.

4) I have never had any luck selling my players on pregens for one shots...much less for whole RPGs that only use pregens by design.

Making characters is fun, unless it's such a pain in the ass that it isn't. In the D&D context, somewhere about in the middle between 1e and 3e would be my preference. 3e was not too bad once you got used to it, but there shouldn't be that much of a learning curve when it comes to making your character (cue railing against how feats were handled, etc.)

(1) do you like character generation yourself?

Yes, but will say it's a bummer when a game has interesting gameplay but poor chargen or vice-versa.

(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

Possibly briefly. I like Lady Blackbird, but would have to say the time I could play it is limited.

Back when TSR's Indiana Jones game came out and I saw it had no chargen, I took it back to the store. I was that put off by the idea of a game without chargen.

(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?

I'm perfectly okay with templates or pre-defined character types (in fact, that's to a certain extent what classes are, and I prefer those to point-buy or similar.) But you don't provide a means to tweak template characters or similar choices to your taste, I see it getting a bit stale.

(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?


I'd like to address his points:

"1. I don't like making decisions based on nothing. I don't like deciding that my character is this great diplomat before I even get a chance to see what the adventure or campaign is going to be like"

And this would be necessary why? Do GMs really not communicate with their players about what good and bad character types would be if they have a specific set of challenges in mind? And if not, would they not present challenges that would give the players challenges in tune with what they want their characters to be good at.

"2. I don't like spending a lot of time making a lot of decisions at once."

This is fair enough. I'd be okay with a system that lets you flesh out choices in play. In fact, that's what I do when playing fate. Only the "top" of the skill pyramid is filled in for a given character; they may fill in their lesser skills during play.

"3. I don't like spending a lot of time on decisions that have little importance"

Sort of like I was illustrating above with FATE characters, I'd be okay with that.

That said, I do think that there is something to be said for making those sorts of choices. It gets you to explore the book and the mechanics. I'm going to be equipped a lot better to use an ability I read up on and pre-selected for my character than one I select in play. Or have selected for me.

Talislanta basically has pre-gens that you customise as you progress.

Quote from: One Horse Town;541616Talislanta basically has pre-gens that you customise as you progress.

Are those pregens, or like templates, kinda like Star Wars d6 with the Kid, the Ewok, the Jedi with a drinking problem and so on?

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541594I'm not a big fan of origin tales and the beginnings of stories anyway.

...without which your characters are going to suck.

:hand:

Backstory is overrated. Develop-in-play for me, thanks.

Quote from: Benoist;541618Are those pregens, or like templates, kinda like Star Wars d6 with the Kid, the Ewok, the Jedi with a drinking problem and so on?

Well, 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).

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541619:hand:

Backstory is overrated. Develop-in-play for me, thanks.

I think there's a balance that needs to be struck. If you handing over a portfolio of stuff at the start of the game, that's way to much. But starting with something like 'I was a mercenary defending the great wall from the orc hoards of Azzagorn before being dismissed by the corrupt count Dyo' is desirable.

Quote from: jadrax;541622I think there's a balance that needs to be struck. If you handing over a portfolio of stuff at the start of the game, that's way to much. But starting with something like 'I was a mercenary defending the great wall from the orc hoards of Azzagorn before being dismissed by the corrupt count Dyo' is desirable.

I agree with this. I don't need a novel for the PCs in my game, but I do need a line or two that sums the character up. That's good enough and the rest can come in gameplay.

Quote from: jadrax;541622But starting with something like 'I was a mercenary defending the great wall from the orc hoards of Azzagorn before being dismissed by the corrupt count Dyo' is desirable.

I like my character to start with a name.

The only relevant backstory to me is the events of the first game-night as seen from the vantage point of the second game-night.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541626I like my character to start with a name.

The only relevant backstory to me is the events of the first game-night as seen from the vantage point of the second game-night.

I must admit, that is not the impression (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/let-me-tell-you-about-my-character.html) I got.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(1) do you like character generation yourself?

Depends, it can be fun as hell or OHGODSOMEBODYSHOOTME.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

Hmm, do you mean the GM or the game system is only allowing pregens?  A game system doing it to me seems odd.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(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?

Sure, I think there is room for other games, it is kind of ironic though, seeing the frontman behind the monstrosity of charop that is 3e want to dump chargen.   Maybe that's why 3e was developed that way, he assumed people were just going to freeball it as they went.  Unfortunately, in a Level system you're trapped into "forced advancement" and since there are only so many slots you can get on your way from Zero to Hero, charop is an inevitability when so many choices are available.

Quote from: Benoist;541528(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

I hate long, complicated chargen that is a series of decisions based on math (point-buy I'm looking at you).  However, I love long, complicated chargen if it unfolds like a lifepath, where it fits into the actual character, with randomness included.  Chargen as a pre-game unto itself is awesome.  Chargen as a min/max charop exercise is useless, toss me a fucking pregen, let me know when you're done stroking your point-penis.  I'll just kill your min/max monster in his sleep anyway. :D

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 (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/let-me-tell-you-about-my-character.html) I got.

Busted. :D

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. :D

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 (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/let-me-tell-you-about-my-character.html) 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. :D

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.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541646My 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.

I see what you did there, and where you're coming from. Real-world places are excellent short-hand for backstories, because just by putting that place into your character's story, you get all of its history and culture inserted without actually having to do a lot of tedious world-building. Maximum results, minimum effort.

I often do the same thing when I'm doing a character for Ars Magica; the locations in "Mythic Europe" are similar enough to their real-world historical counterparts that simply placing a character in one of them provides a lot of background information.

OTOH, if I'm working on a character for one of my GMs' home-brewed original settings, then I'm more than likely to contribute to the "world building" effort and write a thorough background story, including some new material expanding the setting's history, culture and geography. (Subject to the GM's approval; they usually approve.)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541668You have a seat at my table anytime you like.

I hope I get the chance sometime.:)

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541674I see what you did there, and where you're coming from. Real-world places are excellent short-hand for backstories, because just by putting that place into your character's story, you get all of its history and culture inserted without actually having to do a lot of tedious world-building. Maximum results, minimum effort.

I often do the same thing when I'm doing a character for Ars Magica; the locations in "Mythic Europe" are similar enough to their real-world historical counterparts that simply placing a character in one of them provides a lot of background information.

OTOH, if I'm working on a character for one of my GMs' home-brewed original settings, then I'm more than likely to contribute to the "world building" effort and write a thorough background story, including some new material expanding the setting's history, culture and geography. (Subject to the GM's approval; they usually approve.)

I'm becoming a fangirl of ENTIRELY too many people it seems.  In situations like this I do similar things and appreciate it from the GM side, given I have limited time for worldbuilding unlike 30+ years ago.:(

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541667I have zero interest in playing a Batman-style character.

Which is useful to me. I must admit I would place that kind of character background as a prime requisite of a Swashbuckling Game, (Zorro, the Scarlet Pimpernel, even d'Artagnan kind of qualifies). I know at least one system that actually requires you create a nemesis as part of character generation.

Final questions if I may. Is it just as a player you feel this way, or also as a GM? and if its as a GM do you limit your player's backgrounds?

Quote from: John Morrow;541670(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.

That is an absolutely fascinating thought.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;541678That is an absolutely fascinating thought.

I agree and I do believe it completely skews your preferences.  For example I do run games but I'm clearly a player first in my mind.

Off Topic: I'm not entirely sure how to view you TCO given your opinion about me at TBP.  I am can't decide if you're subtlety trolling me or supporting me.

Quote from: Marleycat;541680I agree and I do believe it completely skews your preferences.  For example I do run games but I'm clearly a player first in my mind.

Off Topic: I'm not entirely sure how to view you TCO given your opinion about me at TBP.  I am can't decide if you're subtlety trolling me or supporting me.

It does skew things. I always skew the game towards action(not necessarily combat) because it's what I want.

My opinion of you at TBP is that you sometimes let your emotions or frustrations get the better of you and they punish people for that there. You get more grief there than you deserve because you don't play their moderation game.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;541682It does skew things. I always skew the game towards action(not necessarily combat) because it's what I want.

My opinion of you at TBP is that you sometimes let your emotions or frustrations get the better of you and they punish people for that there. You get more grief there than you deserve because you don't play their moderation game.

If I'm running a game I want clear character generation with no obvious system mastery required, it doesn't have to be simple or fast but obviously preferred. Things like lifepaths or Race/Career ala Warhammer I'm all for. As a player, as long as it's fun I can tolerate anything a few times. Either way it depends on the game system and campaign.  Does it still skew towards action, action, action as a player also?  And one more question ..how do you define action?

As for TBP you actually are not completely offbase. I post here precisely because I don't like or engage in wordplay.  I say what I mean and mean what I say and yes it gets me in trouble but what can you do, unless you enjoy trolling?

Quote from: jadrax;541677I must admit I would place that kind of character background as a prime requisite of a Swashbuckling Game, (Zorro, the Scarlet Pimpernel, even d'Artagnan kind of qualifies).

D'Artagnan receives a favor from Tréville, a friend of his father's - that's the sum total of his backstory's influence on the events of the next thirty-plus years of his career at court.

Quote from: jadrax;541677I know at least one system that actually requires you create a nemesis as part of character generation.

Without knowing anything else, that sounds like a system I'd be disinclined to play.

Quote from: jadrax;541677Is it just as a player you feel this way, or also as a GM?

Yes, I prefer the players' characters to have sketchy backgrounds as well.

Quote from: jadrax;541677and if its as a GM do you limit your player's backgrounds?

I explain to the players that their characters' background is for their use in roleplaying their character, not mine as the referee. I do not write 'stories' or 'plots' around the adventurers.

Players in my Flashing Blades campaign may choose any of the Advantages and Secrets in the game, and I will of course work with whatever they select for their characters, but I don't make what they choose the focus of play. If a player chooses a sworn vengeance, then the object of his ire exists in the game-world and will respond to the adventurer's attempt to seek vengeance appropriately, but the world is filled with potential allies and rivals and I expect that the adventurers will pile much more on their plates than old grudges.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541674I see what you did there, and where you're coming from.

Actually, I think you're reading into it a lot that isn't there.

He's from Brignoles because I didn't want him to be from Marseille. He could just as easily be from Grasse or La Ciotat for all the impact it has on roleplaying the character. It's a shorthand for, 'I'm not from around here,' nothing more.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;541645I have nothing to add other than to say that your avatar is my favorite episode of Twilight Zone.  Excellent taste.

I concur, you have excellent taste. It's one of my favorites as well, and I don't even wear glasses.

I usually love character generation, but only if the games I play allow me to do it quickly and without too much fuss. Shadowrun. Making my Shadowrun character took more time than doing my taxes. Maybe even two times more. I really don't want to go through that again, so I hope My Guy doesn't bite it (we may be switching back to 3.0 soon with that group, anyway). The situation is similar with high-level 3e characters, although at least 3e is presented better than SR. Some more character customisation than OD&D or Basic is welcome, up to simple skill systems, just don't go overboard.

Where I am with Monte is that when I am rolling up PCs, I don't know yet who they are and what they want to become. Those collections of stats will become characters during play, in one or two sessions. That's why I like randomness; it provides interesting combinations that can function as instant hooks. And if a Ride skill, Theology, Move Silently and Herbalism aren't the optimal choices for my Fighter, so be it. At least he will die an interesting person. And if he doesn't, I can explore where the campaign and his set of abilities take him.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541695Actually, I think you're reading into it a lot that isn't there.

He's from Brignoles because I didn't want him to be from Marseille. He could just as easily be from Grasse or La Ciotat for all the impact it has on roleplaying the character. It's a shorthand for, 'I'm not from around here,' nothing more.

Maybe it's because I'm lazy as a GM or player but I get it and love it. Plug and Play and go from there, yup, color me a happy girl.:)

@Melan, your avatar scares me. I hope things are ok?

First, playing a randomly generated character and playing a pregen are EXACTLY THE SAME from a player's POV.

Second, here's how character creation typically went for me:

• Read the setting info, speak to the GM, and wait until a character concept comes to me.
• Try to implement that concept in game.
• Find out I cannot implement that concept.
  
• Compromise my vision in order to implement my character.
• Become overwhelmed and frustrated with the options.
• Become familiar enough with the options that I get distracted.
• Start optimizing combinations for effectiveness.
• End up with a character I don't know 0_o

This got so bad that I just started optimizing out the gate and then justifying, which works well for me as I can add character to anything, but not so well for others who just ended up with boring robots devoid of personality.

One of the biggest complaints about the new Marvel Heroic Roleplaying is that it doesn't have 'character generation' rules, which it totally does, it's just not constrained enough for some. And I can create a new character in that game in 2 minutes. Hell, I can even create that character DURING PLAY! Maybe that game's not perfect, but I want more games in which I can do this.

I think the source of the problem is that character generation rules are the gold reserve which maintains the value of XP, because only by restricting what you can take during character generation does XP have any value. So if you ditch chargen rules, you also have to come up with a fix for XP.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;541701First, playing a randomly generated character and playing a pregen are EXACTLY THE SAME from a player's POV.

They are not the same from this player's point of view.

Quote from: nezach;541705They are not the same from this player's point of view.

Exactly.

Pregen = Not My Guy = Don't Give a Fuck.

Randomly Generated Guy = My Guy = Give a Fuck.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541706Exactly.

Pregen = Not My Guy = Don't Give a Fuck.

Randomly Generated Guy = My Guy = Give a Fuck.

Yeah you typed it out better but Nezach captured it just fine also. You can ignore me though I'm just a casual gamer no harm, no foul.

Quote from: Marleycat;541700@Melan, your avatar scares me. I hope things are ok?

It's Baron Münchhausen from the 1943 movie, which I watched yesterday, and which may be one of the best fantasy movies I have ever seen, if not "the" best - wistful, respectful of its audience, erotic, surreal, human in ways you would never expect from a Joseph Goebbels production (yes), and extremely melancholy. All in sumptuous Agfacolour. What makes it scary?

I haven't read this thread yet, but I saw this and I cannot help answering:

Quote from: chaosvoyager;541701First, playing a randomly generated character and playing a pregen are EXACTLY THE SAME from a player's POV.

No, it's not. Like, not at all.

Besides, there are very few games, if any, where everything is determined randomly.

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 wonder how much of this is conditioned by the expected length of the campaign?

It would seem to me that if one expected a long 20+ plus campaign    there is probably less need for "project conflicts" because over the the course of the campaign these are likely to arise naturally. On the other hand in the game is likely to span 4-5 sessions, having some initial baggage might help.

Quote from: Melan;541721It's Baron Münchhausen from the 1943 movie, which I watched yesterday, and which may be one of the best fantasy movies I have ever seen, if not "the" best - wistful, respectful of its audience, erotic, surreal, human in ways you would never expect from a Joseph Goebbels production (yes), and extremely melancholy. All in sumptuous Agfacolour. What makes it scary?

 Baron Munchausen, classic movie. Very English though so the humor is subtle. Oh, you mean the original, cool.  What are the differences?
.
Your avatar? It's jarring, too pink compared to your previous one? It's fine actually. I'm not a fan of bright colors or clown motif.

I can change it to something different, but - clown motif? That's not a clown, that's a master swordsman. :D

Quote from: Melan;541732I can change it to something different, but - clown motif? That's not a clown, that's a master swordsman. :D

Keep it. I'll be fine. :)

After studying it, it looks like a Musketeer.  I've decided it's the background that throws me.

(1) do you like character generation yourself?

Yes I do, as long as it's simple and straightforward and not tedious.  I like character generation in AD&D, WHFRP, Call of Cthulhu, and even the time I played 4E it was relatively painless.  By contrast, Anima Beyond Fantasy was the worst character generating experience of my life.

(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

I don't exactly get what this means, but maybe something like WHFRP's careers?  Yeah, sure, I'd play that.

(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?

It's called Warhammer.

(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

The idea that the guy who made 3E the way it is with tons of intentionally unbalanced options and needless complexity now sheepishly admitting he doesn't even like character generation makes me explode with nerd rage. I have no stake in 5E but I'm still glad this guy isn't on the team anymore.

Quote from: Aporon;541742(1) do you like character generation yourself?
  By contrast, Anima Beyond Fantasy was the worst character generating experience of my life.
 anymore.

Do not look at Alpha Omega. DO NOT. If Anima is bad, AO will melt your eyes.

Quote from: Soylent Green;541725I wonder how much of this is conditioned by the expected length of the campaign?

I think it's players conditioned to think of telling a story rather than playing a game.

D'Artagnan's backstory is that he grew up on a farm, the son of a soldier. He leaves for Paris with two goals: fight duels, and become a King's Musketeer.

I'm willing to be there are gamers who would call that a lame background.

I'm sure young d'Artagnan had friends and loves and rivals and disappointments and successes while growing up on the family estate in Gascony, but once he leaves for Paris, that period of his life is behind him and plays no part in his subsequent adventures.

Quote from: Silverlion;541749Do not look at Alpha Omega. DO NOT. If Anima is bad, AO will melt your eyes.

You actually were able to read Anime?  I tried, I did seriously but my brain exploded 5 pages in...because of that book I am now Marley Zombie. Seriously, it's like Deleria but way worse, like a bad K-9 trip that never ends.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541753I think it's players conditioned to think of telling a story rather than playing a game.

D'Artagnan's backstory is that he grew up on a farm, the son of a soldier. He leaves for Paris with two goals: fight duels, and become a King's Musketeer.

I'm willing to be there are gamers who would call that a lame background.

I'm sure young d'Artagnan had friends and loves and rivals and disappointments and successes while growing up on the family estate in Gascony, but once he leaves for Paris, that period of his life is behind him and plays no part in his subsequent adventures.

You already know my opinion.  But those 5 things are ENOUGH!  Seriously.

1. Farm Boy
2. His father was a soldier with a sword
3. He moved to his own crib
4. He wants to learn how not to stab himself
5. He likes pussy

Classic Musketeer.:D

Quote from: nezach;541705They are not the same from this player's point of view.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541706Exactly.

Quote from: Claudius;541723No, it's not. Like, not at all.

If you can show me how to tell the difference between a computer program which randomly generates character values individually vs one that simply chooses between different pregens in its database, I will concede the point.

I feel that the most important thing a character generator can do is establish ownership rather than game balance (though that's important too). But really, rolling six attributes doesn't give me any sense of ownership at all, and very little to make assumptions about the character on. And while lifepaths are awesome, they really have to be constructed to fit the setting, and are a minigame in themselves, which is GREAT FUN, but it's still separate from the primary mode of play.

One thing I do not like is the direction some RPGs are taking away from exploration and discovery play. I think a good character generator should allow you to discover who the character is, rather than construct them. However, if you've already discovered who the character is, then having a system where you can implement them as quickly and efficiently as possible is of critical importance, and any 'discovery tools' built into the chargen system just get in the way.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;541768If you can show me how to tell the difference between a computer program which randomly generates character values individually vs one that simply chooses between different pregens in its database, I will concede the point.

I feel that the most important thing a character generator can do is establish ownership rather than game balance (though that's important too). But really, rolling six attributes doesn't give me any sense of ownership at all, and very little to make assumptions about the character on. And while lifepaths are awesome, they really have to be constructed to fit the setting, and are a minigame in themselves, which is GREAT FUN, but it's still separate from the primary mode of play.

One thing I do not like is the direction some RPGs are taking away from exploration and discovery play. I think a good character generator should allow you to discover who the character is, rather than construct them. However, if you've already discovered who the character is, then having a system where you can implement them as quickly and efficiently as possible is of critical importance, and any 'discovery tools' built into the chargen system just get in the way.

Hmm ...sounds like 4e to me. Not good sir.

I can see Monte Cook's reasons for not liking character generation, and by and large I agree. But Pre-generated characters is not the answer. There is no immersion, there. To paraphrase earlier posts, I agree that he has lost touch with a player's perspective.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541753I think it's players conditioned to think of telling a story rather than playing a game.

D'Artagnan's backstory is that he grew up on a farm, the son of a soldier. He leaves for Paris with two goals: fight duels, and become a King's Musketeer.

And we don't get much more of an origin story for Sherlock Holmes, Cyrano de Bergerac, Athelstan King, Tuco the Bandit, Baron Münchhausen or a lot of other fictional characters. There are protagonists with detailed life stories (like the Count of Monte Christo). They are not the only way to depict someone. In adventure stories, characters are first and foremost defined by their actions, the way they interact with their environment. That's a good lesson for RPGs.

(Also, I uploaded a new, less rosy avatar)

You didn't have to do that sir. But I do like it because it's a better view. :)

I agree with your above post also.

Throw me into the pool of people who prefer a very brief backstory, and that the adventures are what makes your character.  Then again, I've never really like the "start as a hero" style that showed up in WOTC editions, and preferred the "zero to hero" style.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;541779Throw me into the pool of people who prefer a very brief backstory, and that the adventures are what makes your character.  Then again, I've never really like the "start as a hero" style that showed up in WOTC editions, and preferred the "zero to hero" style.

Actually I have no issue with 3/4e's Hero baseline. The deal is like OHT I can't be arsed to read a bunch of useless crap. And as a player I just want to play already!  I like that word ""arsed" though.:D

Quote from: Melan;541775In adventure stories, characters are first and foremost defined by their actions, the way they interact with their environment. That's a good lesson for RPGs.

It's also key to playing a game.

Players who write backstories 'full of adventure hooks for the DM!' remind me a guy standing on a pitch waiting for someone to kick the ball to him. You have to get open, pass, steal, tackle to play the game, otherwise you're as useful as the goalpost.

I will be happy to add a character with an interesting background/odd item/dark secret into the campaign, myself, and work with that, just keep it sensible.

Quote from: Melan;541794I will be happy to add a character with an interesting background/odd item/dark secret into the campaign, myself, and work with that, just keep it sensible.

I love Black Vulmea's football reference. Enough about that, I usually do a short paragraph but if the GM wants more I will add obvious story hooks. I'm much more reasonable than what TBP thinks.

@Melan, who is the actor in your avatar? It looks like Peter Sellers, but I'm too lazy to Google it.

Quote from: Melan;541794. . . just keep it sensible.

From noisms' blog: You are responsible for your own orgasm (http://monstersandmanuals.blogspot.com/2012/02/you-are-responsible-for-your-own-orgasm.html).

That's an... interesting analogy.

Quote from: Melan;541824That's an... interesting analogy.

That post is why I gave noisms a pass for standing up for kent. ;)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541753I'm sure young d'Artagnan had friends and loves and rivals and disappointments and successes while growing up on the family estate in Gascony, but once he leaves for Paris, that period of his life is behind him and plays no part in his subsequent adventures.

I don't think there is a necessary condition there. D'Artagnan might have have to left home to find adventure but for Spider-man or Buffy adventure happens much closer to home and neither have any need to leave their past behind. If anything being close to home often gives a face and meaning to what the hero is fight for.

Quote from: Soylent Green;541832I don't think there is a necessary condition there. D'Artagnan might have have to left home to find adventure but for Spider-man or Buffy adventure happens much closer to home and neither have any need to leave their past behind.

You're taking the example far too literally. Leaving home isn't the point.

Let me drop the analogy to make it explicit. My point is that stuff that never happened except in your own imagination means fuck-all compared to what happens once actual play begins. Trying to create conflict out-of-game out of nothing sucks compared to the conflicts that arise out of the shared experiences of actual play.

In other words, don't write a sworn enemy into your character background, 'cause it sucks jagged rocks compared to the enemy you make in actual play, with everyone else participating.

Quote from: Soylent Green;541832If anything being close to home often gives a face and meaning to what the hero is fight for.

There's vastly more meaning attached to the things you fight for that arise out of actual play than the fanwank on your character sheet.

Character backgrounds are used to shortcut actual play. They shift the burden for making actual play fun from the player's shoulders to the referee's. As a player and a referee, I abhor player passivity.

All in my opinion, experience, and so forth.

I love Burning Wheel's lifepath system, and Traveller is fun.

I like Basic D&D/T&T's 3d6 down the line, pick race, class, buy equipment.

I also like FATE's optional chargen where you make up aspects as you play until you hit your max, and the ability to swap out aspects as you see fit if your character changes in some way.

I dislike games where you're asked to make decisions without understanding how those decisions will affect play.

I also dislike games where the math or subsystems could be boiled down to something simpler and still achieve the same effect, whether aesthetic or functional (calculation for its own sake is weird, IMO).

Depends on the game, honestly, and I can't think of any good reasons for prescribing one method of chargen over another, it's just based on the needs of the game.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541847You're taking the example far too literally. Leaving home isn't the point.

Let me drop the analogy to make it explicit. My point is that stuff that never happened except in your own imagination means fuck-all compared to what happens once actual play begins. Trying to create conflict out-of-game out of nothing sucks compared to the conflicts that arise out of the shared experiences of actual play.

Except when they're the same thing. The best role-playing groups I've had the pleasure of gaming with made it a requirement to write up a complete character background, which the GM put to good use in the campaign. The world-building wasn't all up to the GM; it was a cooperative effort with the full participation of the players.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541847In other words, don't write a sworn enemy into your character background, 'cause it sucks jagged rocks compared to the enemy you make in actual play, with everyone else participating.


There's vastly more meaning attached to the things you fight for that arise out of actual play than the fanwank on your character sheet.

This distinction is meaningless: background material IS for use during actual play, with everyone else participating. See above; the campaigns in which our GM actually put our backgrounds to use in creating our campaign were the most immersive that I've been in, and they had the best role-playing. In contrast, I've been in more games than I can count where character backgrounds weren't required, and if offered were seldom used; most of them were dull and uninspiring.

I'll just let the "fanwank" thing slide for now.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541847Character backgrounds are used to shortcut actual play. They shift the burden for making actual play fun from the player's shoulders to the referee's. As a player and a referee, I abhor player passivity.

All in my opinion, experience, and so forth.

My experiences have been just the opposite, so I must disagree. I do agree that the players and GM share responsibility for making the game fun. However, it's my opinion that a "passive" player is one who puts little to no effort into the creative process: he can't be bothered to come up with a character story, even if it would be useful and fun for himself and the GM.

While I don't disagree with everything you're saying Xavier, the benefits you speak of aren't tied to game-prep -- you can have that kind of collaboration and creation during and in-between sessions after the campaign begins.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541706Exactly.

Pregen = Not My Guy = Don't Give a Fuck.

Randomly Generated Guy = My Guy = Give a Fuck.

Exactly.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;541701First, playing a randomly generated character and playing a pregen are EXACTLY THE SAME from a player's POV.

Given a sufficiently large number of pregenerated characters that cover all of the possible rolls and choices, that is mechanically correct but still not correct from either a player perception perspective or a typical presentation perspective.

If everyone in the Pinewood Derby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinewood_derby) starts out with an identical kit and has to build cars to very specific specifications, from the same perspective, the cars are identical.  But what makes them different is that everyone puts their own kit together, tweaks what they put together, paints it differently, and basically makes it their own.  But what really personalizes each car is that each participant (perhaps with some help) actually creates their own car, even if it's statistically identical to the car built by hundreds of other participants.  The act of creation personalizes the creation.  Buying a prebuilt car off the shelf would not have that personal attachment, even if the results were superior to what a person could build themselves.

As for the typical presentation of pregenerated characters, games generally provide so much information with the character that there is little room for personalization or customization.  They generally come with a picture, equipment list, backstory, perhaps some fiction, and even common sayings.  Including pregenerated characters seems to bring out the frustrated novelist in role-playing game writers and that's not what the hobby needs.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;541701Second, here's how character creation typically went for me:

• Read the setting info, speak to the GM, and wait until a character concept comes to me.
• Try to implement that concept in game.
• Find out I cannot implement that concept.
  
• Compromise my vision in order to implement my character.
• Become overwhelmed and frustrated with the options.
• Become familiar enough with the options that I get distracted.
• Start optimizing combinations for effectiveness.
• End up with a character I don't know 0_o

In my experience, D&D isn't about trying to implement a concept but about creating a concept that fits a rough idea and some random rolls.  And it is my opinion that one of the biggest things causing problems in the hobby is the tension between people who know what they want and get frustrated by rules that tell them they can't have it and people who want to be surprised by what the results produced by the rules.  The people who know what they want look for ways to replace random rolls with player and/or GM fiat (this is the root cause of people wanting "narrative control" over the game) and people who want to be surprised embrace the random rolls and have little use for deciding what happens.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;541706Exactly.

Pregen = Not My Guy = Don't Give a Fuck.

Randomly Generated Guy = My Guy = Give a Fuck.

Exactly. (Thirded)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541619:hand:

Backstory is overrated. Develop-in-play for me, thanks.

This x1000

Quote from: Marleycat;5416594 short sentences and I'm Batman.

Heh.  If I was in the market for a sig quote, this would be in my shopping cart.

See, I like Traveller pcgen, 'cause it's interesting, and has enough randomness that it feels like a game in itself.  It takes a minute, but I'm fascinated to see what kind of dude emerges (or doesn't, depending on what service he ended up in ;)  ).  

But making a guy in All Flesh Must Be Eaten - a game and a system I really enjoy - is just a pain in the ass, 'cause there's a lot of pointbuy accounting, and I have to make all the decisions.  That's not a game to me, it's a chore.

Then there's HackMaster 4e.  Character creation - especially if you use the class book lifepath stuff (which is basically adapted straight out of Central Casting) takes FOREVER.  And there's a lot of decision-making (especially in skill  selection), but there's also a lot of gambling (ESPECIALLY in rolling for Quirks & Flaws) and a lot of interesting random event stuff (in the Priors & Particulars section, and in the class training stuff from the splats).  So it's a rewarding process for me.  (Hack is an interesting beast - it's an amazing game and I enjoy what it does, but there's an awful lot I'd never want to see in my day-to-day D&D.)

Quote from: Peregrin;541982While I don't disagree with everything you're saying Xavier, the benefits you speak of aren't tied to game-prep -- you can have that kind of collaboration and creation during and in-between sessions after the campaign begins.

I didn't say they were tied strictly to game prep; the 'best campaigns' I referred to previously benefited from collaboration between the players and GM before and during the game. My point was that I disagreed with Black Vulmea's contention that character background material prior to start-of-game was nothing but meaningless "fanwank" which served no useful purpose.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;542109My point was that I disagreed with Black Vulmea's contention that character background material prior to start-of-game was nothing but meaningless "fanwank" which served no useful purpose.

Except that's not what I said.

I said that making up something by yourself out-of-game is inferior to the stuff that comes out of the shared experience of actual play.

I also said that backgrounds are useful to some players to help them get into their roleplaying frame of mind, and as such they are welcome to write as much as they find helpful to that end. So no, I don't thing backstories are useless - I don't find them useful for the same things you appear to, however.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541981Except when they're the same thing. The best role-playing groups I've had the pleasure of gaming with made it a requirement to write up a complete character background, which the GM put to good use in the campaign. The world-building wasn't all up to the GM; it was a cooperative effort with the full participation of the players.

That may work well for you, but for me, when I'm a player I want nothing to do with world-building outside of actual play. I'll make the world in my image in-character, without the metagaming that some gamers can't seem to live without.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541981This distinction is meaningless: background material IS for use during actual play, with everyone else participating.

This discussion would go so much better if you'd actually respond to what I write, instead of what you think I'm writing.

I never said background material isn't for use in actual play; I said it's not as interesting as the stuff that comes out of actual play.

Saying, 'My character hates the baron de Bauchery because he ravished my sister when I was a boy,' is nowhere near as interesting, or as compelling, as, 'My character hates the baron de Bauchery because last week he stuck a rapier in another player's character's eye.' Everyone at the table experienced the death of the player character at the hands of the baron - no one experienced the long-ago ravishing of the totally made-up sister, not even the player who wrote the background.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541981See above; the campaigns in which our GM actually put our backgrounds to use in creating our campaign were the most immersive that I've been in, and they had the best role-playing. In contrast, I've been in more games than I can count where character backgrounds weren't required, and if offered were seldom used; most of them were dull and uninspiring.

All that proves is that too many gamers believe they're supposed to invent interesting stuff rather than do interesting stuff, that a background that never happened is in some way the same as the experience of playing the game.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541981I'll just let the "fanwank" thing slide for now.

Fanwank isn't pejorative, so get over it, already.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;541981However, it's my opinion that a "passive" player is one who puts little to no effort into the creative process: he can't be bothered to come up with a character story, even if it would be useful and fun for himself and the GM.

The creative process that matters most is the one that happens at the table when the dice are rolling, and that's where I want the players to invest their energy. Stop trying to invent history, and go make some already.

Quote from: John Morrow;542043And it is my opinion that one of the biggest things causing problems in the hobby is the tension between people who know what they want and get frustrated by rules that tell them they can't have it and people who want to be surprised by what the results produced by the rules.  The people who know what they want look for ways to replace random rolls with player and/or GM fiat (this is the root cause of people wanting "narrative control" over the game) and people who want to be surprised embrace the random rolls and have little use for deciding what happens.

Dunno.  I think most people (and games) fall somewhere in the middle.  It's more an issue of understanding what the purpose of your ruleset is, and designing around that.  Some people hate D&D's 3d6 down the line approach in OD&D/Basic, but love REIGN's one-roll chargen.  

Context, more than personal preference, can make or break a game mechanic.  Nobody complains that Team Fortress 2 doesn't have grenades, because in that game not having them objectively improved the play experience.  But that doesn't mean grenades are bad, because if you play Halo, they make perfect sense and make for an extremely enjoyable game.

e:

Also, I don't see this as having anything to do with story-gaming, or wanting to "control the narrative" or whatever so much as it is just a design thing and different takes on what's a reasonable application of random elements.  It's a debate that's also been going on in the board-game community, too.

One reason I hate D&D is because it has a reverse lifepath problem. That is, you end up planning your advancement well in advance of any play, which in my book is even WORSE that having a background that may not fit the campaign. At least in the latter you're open to the direction the campaign takes you.

Quote from: Marleycat;541772Hmm ...sounds like 4e to me.

0_o

How did that in any way sound like 4e? Cause from what little experience I have with it its the exact opposite.

Quote from: Melan;541775In adventure stories, characters are first and foremost defined by their actions, the way they interact with their environment.

But action is only part of it. Motive and point of view are as important, or else you can end up with a generic action achieving robot.

That's one of the things character background is supposed to do on the player's side: Establish motive and perspective. But if you can do that without a background, rock on.

Quote from: Melan;541824That's an... interesting analogy.

And not entirely accurate. That is, you should be responsible for your own 'fun', but other people play a critical part too, and can make it possible for you to have more or less fun.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541847There's vastly more meaning attached to the things you fight for that arise out of actual play than the fanwank on your character sheet.

What if that fanwank consists of events generated by the game's lifepath and character generation system?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;541847Character backgrounds are used to shortcut actual play.

I'll go even farther and say that character generation itself shortcuts 'actual play'.

Quote from: John Morrow;542043If everyone in the Pinewood Derby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinewood_derby) starts out with an identical kit and has to build cars to very specific specifications, from the same perspective, the cars are identical.  But what makes them different is that everyone puts their own kit together, tweaks what they put together, paints it differently, and basically makes it their own.  But what really personalizes each car is that each participant (perhaps with some help) actually creates their own car, even if it's statistically identical to the car built by hundreds of other participants.  The act of creation personalizes the creation.  Buying a prebuilt car off the shelf would not have that personal attachment, even if the results were superior to what a person could build themselves.

I get that. But the processes being compared are random character generation and selecting pregens. A more accurate metaphor would be buying a car that's already different than all the rest, but you don't see how until you open the package.

If random generation were more a process of customization, then I see how it's different, but most such systems make far too many choices for you to be any different than just selecting a pregen (or archetype) and modifying it, which is basically what the folks in your example are doing regarding those cars.

Quote from: John Morrow;542043As for the typical presentation of pregenerated characters, games generally provide so much information with the character that there is little room for personalization or customization.

I agree, and it's flat out bad design most of the time.

However, this is exactly what happens at most murder mystery dinners, and yet I've never had a problem making my character my own. YMMV.

Quote from: John Morrow;542043...and people who want to be surprised by what the results produced by the rules.

I rarely find character generators to be surprising or interesting. I'd certainly use them if they were.

Quote0_o

How did that in any way sound like 4e? Cause from what little experience I have with it its the exact opposite.

Hah! I reread your post more carefully this time. I was on a phone last time and I saw the words "character balance" and that you don't prefer random roll generation and misread the actual intention of the post. I apologize.

Went so far as to blog (http://tabletop.jasnmis.com/?p=12) about this stuff, actually...

I have very little sympathy for his arguments. They boil down to "I don't like to make characters anymore because I've already done it all. So nobody will be able to make exactly the character they want in my games because I don't like that anymore." Yes, there will be some who agree with him, and those folks will like his future games. The rest of us will keep our slide rules handy and play some Champions just to spite him.

Quote from: BlazFeem;546915Went so far as to blog (http://tabletop.jasnmis.com/?p=12) about this stuff, actually...
 
I have very little sympathy for his arguments. They boil down to "I don't like to make characters anymore because I've already done it all. So nobody will be able to make exactly the character they want in my games because I don't like that anymore." Yes, there will be some who agree with him, and those folks will like his future games. The rest of us will keep our slide rules handy and play some Champions just to spite him.

I find that I agree with the vast majority of that blog post.

Monte Cook: I don't like making characters so I won't let any of my players make their own characters anymore.

Me: Who the hell is Monte Cook besides someone I won't ever let be a GM for me?

Quote from: chaosvoyager;546900I rarely find character generators to be surprising or interesting. I'd certainly use them if they were.

Play more Traveller. :p

Quote from: John Morrow;546966Play more Traveller. :p

Ditto.

or WFRP.

or MERP. Shit, i remember when i first got the game, i created about 30 characters just for the hell of it.

Quote from: One Horse Town;546970or WFRP.

Yeah, that was going to be my next recommendation but I decided to keep it short and simple.

What's up with that, in fact? Aren't people creating characters for fun anymore? It's one of the best ways to get the game system short of actual play, too.

Quote from: Benoist;546973What's up with that, in fact? Aren't people creating characters for fun anymore? It's one of the best ways to get the game system short of actual play, too.

My latest one is the DCC RPG.

When it's fun creating characters, you can almost guarantee that the game will also be fun.

Quote from: Benoist;546973What's up with that, in fact? Aren't people creating characters for fun anymore? It's one of the best ways to get the game system short of actual play, too.

And to flesh out your stable of npcs.

Quote from: One Horse Town;546970or WFRP.

or MERP. Shit, i remember when i first got the game, i created about 30 characters just for the hell of it.

I did this constantly for MERPS. It is RM that Marleycat understands.:)

Quote from: One Horse Town;546970or WFRP.

or MERP. Shit, i remember when i first got the game, i created about 30 characters just for the hell of it.

I did this constantly for MERPS. It is RM that Marleycat understands.:)

It's my sweetspot for complexity.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;546900What if that fanwank consists of events generated by the game's lifepath and character generation system?

That's the best of all possible worlds for me - a background generated by actual play.

Quote from: TristramEvans;546947Monte Cook: I don't like making characters so I won't let any of my players make their own characters anymore.

Me: Who the hell is Monte Cook besides someone I won't ever let be a GM for me?

Yeah, him and a fuck-load of people on this thread.

Generating MERP characters was awesome, no doubt about it.

Monte Cook is clearly a lost desperate man flailing around for some sense of direction.

As for character creation, it can usually be one of the highlights of the game, if its done right.  And because it sets the tone in that sense for everything else in the game, its really important that it be done right!

RPGPundit

Quote from: Benoist;541528So here are the questions: (1) do you like character generation yourself?,

That question is a bit too wide, because it has the same problem as asking if you like combat. The only reasonable answer would be: it depends on the system. In some games chargen is great fun, in others is so-so, and in some others is a fucking chore.

Quote(2) Would you play/enjoy an RPG that only allowed pregens?

Yeah, why not.

Quote(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?

I think that pregens are OK and that most games should include them, as long as they are properly made pre-gens (by this I mean PCs created according to the actual rules, by people who understand those rules, not like the shitty PCs of Shadowrun).

Quote(4) some other thoughts to share on the topic of character gen, pregens etc?

In one of my crews (the Cthulhu group) all players love pregens because they know I make them interesting, with lots of meat, properly balanced, and they like to get straight into the action. And after a couple sessions, each player has made the PC its own.

I think that pregens are a great choice for the first time a player or a group tries a game.

Quote from: Imperator;547726I think that pregens are a great choice for the first time a player or a group tries a game.

Totally agree.

Quote from: Marleycat;546994I did this constantly for MERPS. It is RM that Marleycat understands.:)

It's my sweetspot for complexity.

I miss playing MERP for the characters you could create.  

Maybe once the kids start chomping for something new, I'll be able to pull out my old MERP collection.

Quote from: Imperator;547726I think that pregens are a great choice for the first time a player or a group tries a game.

The French Appel de Cthulhu has pregens AND two different modes of character gen spread between three styles of play. Oh my! ;) :D

Quote from: Benoist;547773The French Appel de Cthulhu has pregens AND two different modes of character gen spread between three styles of play. Oh my! ;) :D

I'm a bit rusty on the oul Francais, what would be the general broad strokes ideas there?

Quote from: The Traveller;547777I'm a bit rusty on the oul Francais, what would be the general broad strokes ideas there?

You have a number of pregens included in the character gen chapter, from Cop to Explorer to Lawman to Artist and so on. Basically they are entirely generated, with a few articles you can modify, or shift skill points or skills to reflect what you want out of the character in 5 minutes tops.

Then you have the character gen proper, where you either use EDU (for skills relevant to your profession/occupation) and INT (for free points you can put anywhere) to generate your starting skill points, OR fixed values that are divorced from your stat scores (for the "game balance" whores, I guess).

You have three level of game play which impact character generation. Lovecraftian Horror is the weakest, and generates the characters you are familiar with (EDUx20 and INTx10 Skills OR 320 and 150 point buy). Occult Investigation modifies the multipliers on your EDU and INT to generate your starting skill scores upward (EDUx30 and INTx15 OR 480 and 225 point buy). Pulp Adventures goes further (EDUx40 and INTx20 skills OR 640 and 300 point buy) and adds starting Aplomb, which is a value that is basically substracted from all your Sanity losses and reflects your endurance to psychological trauma, because you've "been there before" in some way.

So there you have it: pregens, plus two types of character gen spread between three play styles.

PS: Huge fan of Jack and the Pork Chop Express here. Your avatar, title and sig rule, man. :)

Add one vote for having some pre-gen characters as well as char gen rules.  I'm all for a quick start guide, and pregens are a great way for a new player to jump right into the game

Quote from: Benoist;547780So there you have it: pregens, plus two types of character gen spread between three play styles.

I saw some of the artwork in the French Cthulhu releases, amazing stuff, good to see they are innovating in the game rules as well. So really you can pick how tough you want your characters to be starting off, based on either your stats or from a fixed point pool, or you can go with pregens. Are the pregens also divided into weak, medium and strong?

Quote from: Benoist;547780PS: Huge fan of Jack and the Pork Chop Express here. Your avatar, title and sig rule, man. :)

That they do.

Quote from: The Traveller;547789I saw some of the artwork in the French Cthulhu releases, amazing stuff, good to see they are innovating in the game rules as well. So really you can pick how tough you want your characters to be starting off, based on either your stats or from a fixed point pool, or you can go with pregens. Are the pregens also divided into weak, medium and strong?

They're created using the Lovecraftian Horror baseline, so basically what you can do from there is pick a pregen, and then make the difference between the starting points of the playstyle you want and Lovecraftian Horror, to then add them to the pregen and get playing ASAP.

Character creation has long been my favorite part of many a game, though it's true that many games fail to make it fun.  

I feel that there are two approaches to chargen: It either needs to be so fun that it can be a game in itself, or it just needs to be super quick and get the hell out of the way.  

Pretty much all my current favorite games fit in one of those categories.  Traveller, Heroes Unlimited, and M&M3 do the former really well, while old school D&D based games like my own Hulks and Horrors do the latter.

Horses for courses.

I like lifepath generation for certain games.
I like random for certain gameas
I like point buy for certain games

I usually have an idea inspired by the genre/setting of what I want to play. Generaly i want to find a way to play that character, but I don;t mind if the character is random so long as there is some wiggle room (like roll 6 stats and arrange to taste)
I don;t mind totally random if the genre suits.

I am fine with pregens for cons but hate the idea that you select a pregen for actually campaign play and then develop them through play, its just horrid.

I always played FATE with newbies with blank character sheets and we created characters as we went, that way when someone needed to shoot a pirate I asked them 'how good do you want to be at that', when another wanted to distract the captain I asked them 'do you want to be as good as you're shooting, better or worse?' so people built their characters as they went and figured out what they wanted to be good at

Now a game that simplifies chargen to what really matters, I think that works, let people add their little bonuses as time goes on. For me, I have bought a ton of RPG's and my first test of them is how fun and easy it is to create player character's. Too much page flicking? Too much number crunching? Not enough theme and story coming out of the process?

That experience has partly led to me creating the new Expeditions rpg for Achtung! Cthulhu as I wanted character creation to be so much fun, to communicate the spirit of the game and to be much more instant so we can get playing.

That said I think Monte had some very valid points, especially about all those little modifiers and tweaks just not really having as much impact as the first decision about being a fighter or a elf rogue etc.

Quote from: J Arcane;547830Character creation has long been my favorite part of many a game, though it's true that many games fail to make it fun.  

I feel that there are two approaches to chargen: It either needs to be so fun that it can be a game in itself, or it just needs to be super quick and get the hell out of the way.  

Pretty much all my current favorite games fit in one of those categories.  Traveller, Heroes Unlimited, and M&M3 do the former really well, while old school D&D based games like my own Hulks and Horrors do the latter.

My position as well.

Quote from: Benoist;541528"I hate character generation." (http://montecook.livejournal.com/253552.html)

Responding to Cook's post:

(1) The first point only applies if (a) the GM is railroading you and (b) refuses to tell you what the railroaded adventure or campaign is about. The second point only applies if the system features an anemic advancement mechanic so that you can't change or add to your character's focus.

(2) Does speak to a mismatch between what new players and experienced players want. One of the mistakes of D&D has been to move more and more of the advanced customization options that are only meaningful to experienced players into the core rulebooks while making them an essential part of character creation (thus making the game significantly less appealing and accessible to new players).

Re: Pregenerated characters. I disagree that this is the solution. Sure, throw some pregens in there if you want to or have to. But in working with a lot of new players over the past couple of years, I've found that the process of character creation (as long as it remains accessible for them) is engaging and intensely interesting for them. Accessible choices that define who their character is gives them an immediate sense of possession over that character and also makes the character "real" instead of just being a pregenerated pawn. Character creation gets new players roleplaying faster than pregenerated characters.

Re: Fast character generation. I agree with this. OD&D is basically the ideal model, with the only laborious portion being equipment selection.

If I were going to design a character creation system, I would focus heavily on making the initial choices very simple. Advanced customization options would then start arriving very quickly as the character advances during play. Legends & Labyrinths effectively does this by allowing the players to switch over to "all the bells and whistles" 3E character creation at any point they want to.

I thought that the way Star Wars d6 templates and Talislanta characters worked were both fine. I definitely don't want to have to sit down with tons of splat books to make the "correct" character.

I REALLY like WEG Star Wars chargen. Pick a template, add dice to your skills, customize a bit here and there, and boom, done. That is really cool, and when you know the game, that doesn't take 5 minutes of your time. Really awesome.