I've been gaming for over 30 years but only really been reading a lot of forums on the topic for a year or so. Sure there was Usenet before that but, well, not the same thing really. Anyway when you talk to a thousand or so people only in text and distributed over a wide geographic region (the planet, basically), it turns out that a lot of the time you're all using the same words but not necessarily saying the same things at all.
Anyway, one place this came up was in discussions of difficulties in character creation and GM expectations not meeting up. I found this idea profoundly confusing -- I could not understand how it was remotely possible for characters to fail to line up with the GMs game idea. Then I realised that a substantial majority of these people just get the players to make characters AWAY FROM THE TABLE. For thirty years, without ever questioning it, we've set a night's gaming aside for character creation and discussion about how the game is going to work with them. The idea of going away and making characters on our own just never occurred to us.
So, how about you? Creation at the table or away? Reliably one or the other or a mix by system, whim, whatever? What obstacles does your choice present? What opportunities?
Quote from: HalfjackSo, how about you? Creation at the table or away? Reliably one or the other or a mix by system, whim, whatever? What obstacles does your choice present? What opportunities?
I used to do character gen away from the table and hated doing it together, because I'd be bored. As I continued to game I learned that the games I played in and, especially, the games I ran were *substantially* improved through group character generation. Everyone is on the same page, every character has their niche, and the process often defines the campaign.
Today it's always group character generation. I don't see any obstacles other than getting folk together. For games with monstrous numbers of supplements, such as D&D, not having access to all of those can be a problem but in that case I'd have the player hammer out the concept and then mechanically build it away from the table if necessary. D&D is really the only game where I've encountered this, however.
The opportunities are many. Character relationships are often defined, character capabilities become known to everyone, and players often feed off of each others cool ideas to get really excited about a new game. It's great!
Quote from: HalfjackSo, how about you? Creation at the table or away? Reliably one or the other or a mix by system, whim, whatever? What obstacles does your choice present? What opportunities?
Ever since I entered the work force, got married, 2.5 children, etc., play time is precious, so yeah, I see telling players to make up characters for a game at a set time so we can get playing. (In practice, that rarely happens... someone is always a straggler and we are always spending of the first session finishing up chargen.
Mismatched expectations is something I used to run into all the time, and I've slowly learned that the more options you have, the bigger chance players are going to do something that just doesn't fit, so it pays to be pretty explicit about what your expectations were up front. It used to be I never did that.
Tangential to your comments, Caesar, I find that nowadays we're far more likely to talk about the game itself than we used to be. End of evening discussion of what worked and what didn't has become a staple instead of an exception. And obviously, then, character generation and game direction gets discussed a lot before the game.
Do you play any games that clearly EXPECT character generation to take place at the table?
Nowdays I deal with mostly away from the table character generation. Mainly because my time for gaming is pretty limited. Questions I deal with via email or the phone before hand. This allows us to get right to the game instead of waiting for a few folks to get things done, or the guy who spends an hour deciding on equipment, not to mention the person who takes twenty minutes just to come up with a name.
Quote from: peteramthorNowdays I deal with mostly away from the table character generation. Mainly because my time for gaming is pretty limited. Questions I deal with via email or the phone before hand. This allows us to get right to the game instead of waiting for a few folks to get things done, or the guy who spends an hour deciding on equipment, not to mention the person who takes twenty minutes just to come up with a name.
Do you think the game you choose influences this at all?
Quote from: peteramthorNowdays I deal with mostly away from the table character generation. Mainly because my time for gaming is pretty limited. Questions I deal with via email or the phone before hand. This allows us to get right to the game instead of waiting for a few folks to get things done, or the guy who spends an hour deciding on equipment, not to mention the person who takes twenty minutes just to come up with a name.
This is the same set of problems I run into.
Quote from: HalfjackDo you think the game you choose influences this at all?
Sometimes. Currently I'm running two games Sla Industries and red box D&D. The Sla character creation system is a little long and can take a while so I really hate waiting for players to get done with somethings, especially when there is only a couple of core rule books floating around the table. D&D of that edition is so blood simple that characters can be cranked out in a few minutes so doing that at the table doesn't bother me.
Now some games are made to generate the group all at once, original Conspiracy X (haven't seen the new one yet) comes to mind right off the bat. If I was running something like that I can see doing it away from the table.
But with the level that most of my players are connected online it works out really well for us to do things like we are. I've backwards calculated a few characters once or twice and have never caught any of them adding things in.
Quote from: peteramthorBut with the level that most of my players are connected online it works out really well for us to do things like we are. I've backwards calculated a few characters once or twice and have never caught any of them adding things in.
That's interesting to me that trust would be an issue in this, but I guess obviously it can be. I don't think that we, for example, ever avoided away-from-table generation because of trust issues but then we never ran into any because we always created at the table. :D Now I think we're all at the point where if someone wants to bend the rules to get the character they want then it's probably a pretty cool character. In the past I have certainly gamed with people that were not so dependably interested in the success of the game.
Quote from: HalfjackDo you play any games that clearly EXPECT character generation to take place at the table?
Since I am having trouble thinking of one other than Burning Empires (which sort of assumes the group will set aside a session to make THE WORLD), I guess not.
Group chargen is the way to go IMO, and this is irrespective of game system. It's not time wasted at all. You can tailor the group more easily to the specific campaign, e.g. by selecting skills for the PCs that a) will be useful and b) complement each other. You can nip problems in the bud ("my PC's an orphaned loner"; three people wanting to play the same character class; cheating at attribute rolls). And you get a ballpark sense of possible group dynamics.
I think too that with group character generation comes the possibility of some group backstory (though there are games now that handle this is part of generation mechanically anyway) which seems valuable to me.
Quote from: HalfjackThat's interesting to me that trust would be an issue in this, but I guess obviously it can be.
Well the trust issue isn't really a factor here either until there were rumors of somebody doing some excessive fudging on their characters. Turned out to be false and likely to be a fake story because player A doesn't like player B.
Then again sometimes it is probably just as easy to cheat at making a character right in front of the GM. Especially in a point distribution game with high numbers.
As far as group dynamics forming in the character creation process I had another thought. In most of the groups I play with there is usually no 'set' group that plays. You have a core of three or four people that will always be there and then some who show up for a while then leave and new people drift in. That and we always seem to lose a core person due to shift changes at a job or a whole new job altogether. Basically we got used to a rotating roster of players.
Quote from: peteramthorAs far as group dynamics forming in the character creation process I had another thought. In most of the groups I play with there is usually no 'set' group that plays.
That's interesting and I can see how it could quite change the social dynamic at the table. Our group is a long-standing group of four and tightly enough meshed that if one can't make it then the other three find something else to do. I guess we're pretty insular. :D
I prefer to hammer out character, expectations of play and so on before the actual game. Not doing it can sabotage a game, and ruin someones fun.
Depending on the players and situation, mismatched characters can be fun. I like chargen prior to the game so people who want to futz around a bunch or look up rule details can take as much time as they want. You just need to give guidelines of what you expect. I think odd groups add to the fun. I'd rather have an unusual mix than the same old balanced party. If 3 people show up with very similar characters, I'll think of a reason for it and make them come up with ways to define themselves away from the archetype.
I like group discussion about said things - at the table or via e-mail - but I'm not sure to what degree characters are truly made as a result of such things as opposed to just modified. That is, you come to the table with a concept or concepts, and just modify them according to what's said. For example, instead of ditching the acerbic fighter with a dark past, he just becomes an acerbic cleric with a dark past.
Seanchai
I want characters to be done before the game starts. Send me a copy in email or work some stuff out over the phone.. but try and have it done before the game begins if at all possible. (Exceptions for new players, of course.)
I want players to make the characters they want. There is a clear set of rules for the game I play, and we're not running astrological charts here. Get it done beforehand.
Also, I advise the character starts as a mostly blank slate; don't write a backstory, don't pick his favorite colors or anything. Develop the character as a person in game, and not beforehand.
I find character generation sessions frustrating. If everyone is together, we should be slinging dice and kicking ass. Chargen can be hashed out in email.
Quote from: Abyssal MawI want players to make the characters they want. There is a clear set of rules for the game I play, and we're not running astrological charts here. Get it done beforehand.
What if the clear set of rules indicate at-table character generation and imply some backstory?
Quote from: HalfjackWhat if the clear set of rules indicate at-table character generation and imply some backstory?
Then the game is broken. HAH!
I prefer group character generation but the concept is pretty much foreign to the guys I play with. The time we tried this 75% of our time was spent limping through HERO character creation.
I will never, ever do group chargen again. I found it to be a boring, obnoxious, dreadful experience.
I did it when I started my Rifts game. It was a disaster. I had to run around and answer people's individual questions the whole time while other people sat around, bored, waiting for me to get to them.
Plus, it provided no real benefit. No one wanted to create a back story right there - they wanted to create the mechanics of the character then "think about it" for a while. As others here mentioned, some players take weeks just to think up a name, much less a backstory. There was a brief, half-hearted discussion of who should pick what character class (to balance out the group), but that was about it.
As for games that expect group chargen and won't work without it? Probably not my type of game.
Any thoughts about how system dependent these biases might be? I can see some coarse outlines myself.
Quote from: jgantsI will never, ever do group chargen again. I found it to be a boring, obnoxious, dreadful experience.
9 times out of 10, I agree with you. Heck, better than 9. It's nice when two or more players' characters mesh, whether intentionally or on accident, but it's a drag when you have three to six players trying too hard shoehorn their character concepts into the same crowded boot. Perhaps even worse is when a couple of players get carried away with the idea without the enthusiastic approval or cooperation of the rest of the players. Admittedly, this last scenario can (and does) sometimes emerge during play well after chargen.
!i!
Quote from: HalfjackAny thoughts about how system dependent these biases might be? I can see some coarse outlines myself.
Well, clearly the more options you have at chargen, the longer it will take. And the longer it takes, the less fun it will be to do in a group setting.
GURPS, HERO, Palladium...stuff like that takes people a while. There's a lot of choices there. Compare that to a rules light game (like, say, the old Basic D&D set) where you can create a character in 15 mins - sure, that's going to work better in a group setting.
I'm not so sure its a bias so much as recognizing that group chargen doesn't work very well with games that have complex chargens.
Quote from: HalfjackAny thoughts about how system dependent these biases might be? I can see some coarse outlines myself.
Sure. In general the crunchier the system, the harder it will be to do group chargen in a reasonable time period. I did group chargen for my
Traveller campaign. Everybody made two or three characters in 90 minutes or so, then we spent the rest of the afternoon zooming around the Spinward Marches.
Quote from: jgantsI'm not so sure its a bias so much as recognizing that group chargen doesn't work very well with games that have complex chargens.
Sorry, that certainly qualifies as a bias the way I intended the word -- I didn't mean to load it with the usual negative connotations.
Quote from: jgantsWell, clearly the more options you have at chargen, the longer it will take. And the longer it takes, the less fun it will be to do in a group setting.
This is why I can readily see everyone agreeing on a broad scope of character
concepts -- even a more specific scope if everyone's into it -- when the game is first proposed. Within that established context, everyone goes off on their own to create their characters. Thematically linked, but not slavishly interdependent.
!i!
If chargen is fast, we do group chargen, if it's slow we try to do it away from the table.
I play once a week, I'm time pressured, losing a week's game for chargen is just not going to happen.
We'll usually have a short discussion of the types of characters people would like to run, and there is occasionally some type of change as a result. ("Gee. We really should have a healer of some sort, shouldn't we?")
Otherwise, character generation is usually done away from the table. Usually because we don't have that much time to game anyway. Although I prefer everyone creating characters as a group, it usually doesn't work out that way.
One issue is often eagerness. I know when I'm about to start playing in a new game, I want to work on my character *now*, and not have to wait for the game session. Especially if I have a character concept I really like.
Not sure how I missed this one, considering my group got together Monday night to do this for the first time in many years of gaming as a group. Well, mostly - actual mechanical character creation didn't happen yet, but they know what they want to play.
It was kind of the best of both worlds, actually; it was a last minute session that nobody knew was going to happen, so it started late and had no pressure attached to it. We'd already decided on the basic premise - crash-landed Republic marines (the kind with boarding tanks :D) trying to get off a hostile alien world. I started off with no idea how they'd go about trying to get mechanically different characters without making a band of hyperspecialist soldiers, and the answer surprised me: Play the other guys, those servicemen and women we rarely see (except for J, who's playing a psychic petty criminal recently drafted into the military psi program - still in orange jacket and handcuffs in the lifeboat!) who lack the military skills of battle-tested Expeditionary Force marines. I know they want no information about the cause of the crash (I'm having a lot of fun with that fact), limited supplies, and natives they'll be able to negotiate with (given time). I know they're thinking of getting off the planet and continuing to play these characters.
As I was getting into a player's car for a ride home, she exclaimed with a degree of shock "Why have we never done that before?". The need was really highlighted by our last L5R game, which began on the Crab Wall and we quickly realized that once we were (IC) allowed to leave, we had no reason to ever speak to each other again. I think a session zero has just become our SOP.
As a GM I spend a lot of time rustling up my players, and getting characters made in advance is a good technique for me. One, it allows me plenty of time for one on one discussion without crowding. Two, it gives the player incentive to show up for the first few games... enough time to get them hooked.
As an amusing anecdote, my D&D group the GM is pretty open minded, but our last characters were made at the table. We wound up with two clerics and no wizard. Go figure. One supposes the Psionist filled the spell caster niche. :raise:
Quote from: Halfjack... we've set a night's gaming aside for character creation and discussion about how the game is going to work with them.
This is exactly how my group does it. After I tell them about my concept for a campaign they not only think about charcater concepts on their own but also possible ideas that contribute to the "atmosphere" of the campaign. We set aside one night of gaming to create charcters and talk about the campaign setting and generally just hang out whilst making sure everyone is on the same page. Campaign "confusion" is not a problem I have encountered.
Regards,
David R