Character creation

[Arnwyn]

I despise making characters - whether they're my own (as a player) or (especially) if they're NPCs. An awful awful boring process.

(Though, contrary to the poll option's additional sentence, I don't "wish" it could go faster because I know it can.)

 

[Wombat]

For me, it doesn't matter rules light or rules heavy, with the extra background ifo I like to proviude character creation always takes a while.

Yep.

One of the longest time I spent on creating a single character was in a game of Over The Edge, an incredibly Rules Lite system -- just because there are fewer rules it does not necessarily follow that character creation will be faster or simpler.

Personally, I love taking a lot of time to develop good characters. Fast character mechanics are fine for mooks and grogs, but for real characters I take my time, develop backgrounds, come to understand motivations, and general go all Method Acting School on him or her. This process applies whether this is a PC or an NPC -- characters are not simply numbers on a page with a few bits of equipment and a couple of feats. Characters are people and I want to know them.

My players are pretty much in the same school; one of the women in the group is more into "build 'em fast, build 'em simple", but the others are crafters. One character went through some very serious discussions over whether this god would prefer him to carry a mace, a maul, a club, or a quarterstaff -- took him 20 minutes just to decide that point, with a lot of background and theological issues brought up in the process.

If I am just whipping out a character it is because the character is unimportant, just a bit of background material to aid, sell things, or get killed -- at that point it is down to wargaming mentality. If I am putting together a character that I would like to see advance over a long time, give me all sorts of time. I want to make sure I get him just right.

 

[jmucchiello]

Though, I am curious how you resolve "skill checks" in OD&D. I mean, that whole concept of "skills" is out of the bag, so to speak, in game terms. You can't make players forget about those concepts. How do you handle a concept like say, a fighter who, as a hobby, studies ancient Babylonion myths? In 3e terms, he might spend points on Knowledge (ancient Babylonia), but that wouldn't translate into OD&D or even C&C. How does one adjudicate such a thing?

The DM takes his right (or left) hand and raises it to shoulder level. Next he swings it back and forth loosely. What does it matter how one adjudicates the fighter's ability to recall Babylonian myths? If the DM includes a Babylonian myth in the game, you just assume the fighter recalls it. If the basketweaving fellow needs to make a basket, he makes one. It is unlikely that the fate of the world will hinge on such feats daring-do and thus you don't HAVE to have a mechanic for it.

Try this: The player says the character is going to eat a steak. Is that a Dex check? Str check to successful cut the steak into proper-sized morsels? Wis check to properly salt and pepper the steak so that he enjoys the flavor more? At some point, you just assume the character succeeds at simple tasks. A game without skills is a game where basketweaving and Babylonian myth lore are simple tasks.

 

[sniffles]

I'm certainly not one of those people. I've only taken one PrC of all the 3e characters I've made, and I intentionally gave "illiteracy" to a sorcerer because it made sense for her backstory. So, I think I'm in agreement that the abilities should match the history, but I do like the customization that comes from being able to tweak all the little things - skills, abilities, etc, to match that history.

With some systems, like C&C for example, or OD&D, a level is defined as some hit dice, and a another +1 to hit, for example. So, there isn't any way to reflect that for the last few months you're character has been studying the ancient art of basketweaving, and has now mastered it. So, systems without skills, while allowing for quicker character creation, tend to create more bland PCs, IMHO.

I'm in the same boat opinion-wise. I would only take a prestige class that seemed appropriate to the character's experiences, not just because it had some cool ability that I'd like my character to have. I also sometimes create characters just for the fun of it, even if I have no hope of ever playing that character in a camaign.

I agree about the "simpler" systems making blander characters. Oddly, there is one system that this doesn't hold up for, though: Risus, the Everything RPG has a great fun, detailed creation system, but no skills, so your character ends up being almost more fun to create than to play!

 

[LostSoul]

I didn't answer the poll, because the first and second options both apply to me. As a player, I love being able to spend some time creating a meaningful character. As a DM, it's a pain in the ass to have to spend more than a few minutes giving an NPC numbers, etc. to represent their abilities.

I agree exactly.

Although I voted "hate" because I feel there's not enough of that in our society today. Somebody has to fight against the tide of anti-haters.

Oh, and I tend to create more characters as a DM than as a player.

 

[Eluvan]

I'm in two minds on this. It's been pretty well established that for a lot of people the longest part of character creation is the background, and that goes for me too. I don't begrudge time spent on that, because it's a creative outlet and I enjoy doing it. But when it comes down to crunch time... for my own characters, I don't mind. I like having a big selection of feats and skills and so on, and the math doesn't hurt so much when I know it's going towards creating a character I'm going to enjoy playing.

Hell, there's even something quite nice about filling in a character sheet in all its hideous complexity. It's like a comforting little ritual.

As a DM... well, making NPCs doesn't bother me. I concentrate on the stats I'm actually going to need, so the number crunching doesn't get too onerous. The only time it starts to get a bit much is at higher levels where you're dealing with heavily modified monsters with advanced HD and templates up the wazoo and so on. But... making critters like that has a charm all of its own, so I don't mind so much.

What *does* get to me is how long it takes my players to make their characters when I'm DMing. Maybe this is just me, but I'm sure I can't be the only DM to have this problem. My players will agonise for hours on end over a character sheet, and not about the important bits either. They'll usually come to the table already knowing their character's background in detail (though three of the four I usually play with have a weird habit of refusing to write the stuff down), which is great. But then they completely crush the warm, fuzzy feeling I get from that by taking an eternity over deciding which feat they want, or what to do with their last skill point, or even what class they should start as (if they're planning on a multiclassed character).

So... as a player, I'm happy. As a DM, in my planning capacity, I'm happy. But as a DM in my waiting-for-my-players-to-finish-their-goddamn-sheets capacity, I'm definitely not happy.

 

[ElvishBard]

I enjoy creating the character. I start with the background and who they are, then I look at the options and see how well they reflect how I pictured the character. I dislike when my players have to make an PC though, because they are all really new, or worse are older and confused about the different editions, and I end up making their characters based on what they say, but because I won't be playing the character it isn't as enjoyable.

I should mention that it doesn't take me long to make a character once I have the background, a level 10 dwarf barbarian took me under 10 minutes, counting equipment.

 

[TerraDave]

We love it! But this is Enworld after all...

 

[drothgery]

I love fussing with options and equipment and stuff. But I'd like to be able to put together a mid-level character in less time.

 

[Tonguez]

What does it matter how one adjudicates the fighter's ability to recall Babylonian myths? If the DM includes a Babylonian myth in the game, you just assume the fighter recalls it. If the basketweaving fellow needs to make a basket, he makes one. It is unlikely that the fate of the world will hinge on such feats daring-do and thus you don't HAVE to have a mechanic for it.

Um remember the scene in Conan the Destroyer when he fights the ressurected god Dagon and the only way to destroy it is to remove the horn.

In the movie the information was provided by an NPC but in other circumstances it might be a Knowledge:Myth check and could very well be the defining moment of the adventure,

In another example their is a Polynesian myth about a giant carniverous bird (a giant eagle btw) who was attacking a village. The hero built a trap which consisted of saplings woven together (ie Craft: Basketweaving) beneath which he placed himself as bait - the bird struck got it claws caught in the snare and the hero was able to spear it as it struggled to escape

My own people have a story about how my ancestors snared (Craft:Trapmaking) a giant lizard and were able to slay it

which is why a mechanic to test such things is important

but yes in OD&D it was largely handwaved which is why DnD is considered by many to be about beating up monsters - handwave the 'character'...