I'm a fan of characters in RPGs. I really run them to watch the players run through problems as I crank the screws down on them. I ran a D&D Next campaign that started as ad hoc as you could: I like Dark Sun, and I wanted to test the system. Before it was done, the players had won a war, killed a king, and were wrapped up in internecine civil strife with assassins and secret societies taking pot shots at them. They died as many adventurers before them died: down a hole hoping to bring back enough treasure to bankroll a shipping fleet. With a beholder.
I had a great time running the game, but there were moments where the tossed together nature grated on everyone's nerves. Why the hell was the halfling barbarian hanging out with these schmucks? Anyway, now that I'm about to relaunch the campaign, I've decided to cut this off at the pass. I play a lot of Fiasco. I know, storygame, swine, wauggh, whatever. It's fun as hell. I sawed the relationship method off and stitched it onto the stump of D&D, cutting out the sections designed to make everyone hate each other.
So in a couple weeks, when all the players get together again, we'll grab a pile of d6's and roll them into a pile in the middle of the table. The player's already know their general character info: I want a druid, I want a fighter, so on and so forth. The players will go clockwise around the table and pick out a d6 to define the relationship with the left hand character. So they might pick a 2, which on my chart is Crime and Punishment. The characters go around the table, building these general connections, Once they get to the first person again, they reverse, and define the more specific connection, depleting the pool of dice at the table. So that character who has the Crime and Punishment connection defined gets to refine it. He's got a pool of dice on the table and a chart like so:
Crime and Punishment
1. Escaped from slave pits together
2. Gambler and man on the inside
3. Got in deep with the wrong people, helping you get out.
4. Thieves in law
5. Indentured Servant / Bonded Owner
6. Thief-hunter and informant
He picks up a 5 off of the table, and defines the relationship as an indentured servant of his character. It's a contentious relationship, but not one that will lead to murder death kill. These are set up specifically for Dark Sun, hence the slavery/servitude theme.
Anyway, we'll see how it works at the table. I have a couple players who are slow starters and really need the push to start, and a few players who love riffing off of ideas. I suppose it would backfire if your players are rigorously old school and want to develop characters without much backstory or if they're the kind of players who want to rigorously define their characters ahead of time.
Nothing against Fiasco, I have a copy of it myself. But moving this to other games since this seems more appropriate for that sub forum.
My solution was always "Make characters that work together. I don't care why. If you care, you figure it out."
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;717382Nothing against Fiasco, I have a copy of it myself. But moving this to other games since this seems more appropriate for that sub forum.
Huh. Game's still run with a d20 and a GM. This is just pregame seeding.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;717382Nothing against Fiasco, I have a copy of it myself. But moving this to other games since this seems more appropriate for that sub forum.
Um, the game is D&D Dark Sun, it seems, not Fiasco.
Fiasco is only partially used, and only as a kind of relationship-engine during Character Generation, unless i have read it wrong.
(.... I think this calls for a new thread ...)
I did something similar recently in my sand box but just told the players to make a connection with two other characters. They created characters before knowing who else was playing what.
Ok first off I'm not at all a story gamer. Nor defending storygaming. But it sounds more like he basically made a life path system not to unlike traveller/CP2020/MW forging connections/background. Am I wrong?
Quote from: Ronin;717719Ok first off I'm not at all a story gamer. Nor defending storygaming. But it sounds more like he basically made a life path system not to unlike traveller/CP2020/MW forging connections/background. Am I wrong?
(compares to my copy of CP 2020.)
You are right, i got the same impression, at least.
Quote from: JonWake;717416Huh. Game's still run with a d20 and a GM. This is just pregame seeding.
Or is it storygame wankery (TM)?
The quip aside, I like the idea of using Fiasco's connection generation in other games, especially when it'd be good to have a party tied beyond a common goal and even usual bound of friendship.
When i mix d&d with Fiasco i get daf disco.
I'll get me coat...
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;717382Nothing against Fiasco, I have a copy of it myself. But moving this to other games since this seems more appropriate for that sub forum.
Bad call. Other RPGs with similar stuff include Mekton Z and Mongoose Traveller.
Quote from: JonWake;717380I'm a fan of characters in RPGs. I really run them to watch the players run through problems as I crank the screws down on them. I ran a D&D Next campaign that started as ad hoc as you could: I like Dark Sun, and I wanted to test the system. Before it was done, the players had won a war, killed a king, and were wrapped up in internecine civil strife with assassins and secret societies taking pot shots at them. They died as many adventurers before them died: down a hole hoping to bring back enough treasure to bankroll a shipping fleet. With a beholder.
I had a great time running the game, but there were moments where the tossed together nature grated on everyone's nerves. Why the hell was the halfling barbarian hanging out with these schmucks? Anyway, now that I'm about to relaunch the campaign, I've decided to cut this off at the pass. I play a lot of Fiasco. I know, storygame, swine, wauggh, whatever. It's fun as hell. I sawed the relationship method off and stitched it onto the stump of D&D, cutting out the sections designed to make everyone hate each other.
So in a couple weeks, when all the players get together again, we'll grab a pile of d6's and roll them into a pile in the middle of the table. The player's already know their general character info: I want a druid, I want a fighter, so on and so forth. The players will go clockwise around the table and pick out a d6 to define the relationship with the left hand character. So they might pick a 2, which on my chart is Crime and Punishment. The characters go around the table, building these general connections, Once they get to the first person again, they reverse, and define the more specific connection, depleting the pool of dice at the table. So that character who has the Crime and Punishment connection defined gets to refine it. He's got a pool of dice on the table and a chart like so:
Crime and Punishment
1. Escaped from slave pits together
2. Gambler and man on the inside
3. Got in deep with the wrong people, helping you get out.
4. Thieves in law
5. Indentured Servant / Bonded Owner
6. Thief-hunter and informant
He picks up a 5 off of the table, and defines the relationship as an indentured servant of his character. It's a contentious relationship, but not one that will lead to murder death kill. These are set up specifically for Dark Sun, hence the slavery/servitude theme.
Anyway, we'll see how it works at the table. I have a couple players who are slow starters and really need the push to start, and a few players who love riffing off of ideas. I suppose it would backfire if your players are rigorously old school and want to develop characters without much backstory or if they're the kind of players who want to rigorously define their characters ahead of time.
I don't care what anyone else says, I think this is a really cool idea. Not just for D&D but for almost any RPG. I could see doing something like this for Shadowrun also.
Here's how it turned out.
(https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Fo0y0cY-8QZjFpwQIeyxJYCj2zKvwJbijoFApTqmwx4/pub?w=960&h=720)