DM Forcing Characters on Players

[dontpunkme]

Have any of you guys and gals out there ever player in a campaign where the DM assigned characters to players? This can mean any number of things:
1) These following characters (elf fighter, dwarf barbarian, etc) must be chosen divide them amongst yourself
2) You're character died. Luckily, I have this "insert pre-made character here" all ready to go. Hope you enjoy you're "insert pre-made character here@"
3) You player A must be the wizard, you player B must be the halfling rogue, etc.
4) Etc.

I've played in several groups like this. Problems that I've seen range from storylines that revolve too centrally around one character and thus player eventually realizes this and for spite tries to get himself killed despite DM intervention to players that just aren't happy with the character that was forced upon them, etc. I've also seen this go the way of great epic storylines that everyone really enjoys. What other problems/benefits have you guys seen with this?

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

First vote is for the power of SPITE!

But I only voted for that because my answer is I've never had a game like this, and felt like being difficult. "No" is just so boring...

 

[Bryan898]

I've done both, and throughly enjoyed both. The one thing I find that works well is to make a wide variety of pre-made characters (like 10 or so), have multiple plot ideas for each character, and bribe the PCs with PC drawings . Then when they pick the pre-made's work with the hooks you have remaining. Keeping it so that one central character isn't needed for the plot, and having multiple optional plots, makes it easier to keep the game from revolving around one character. If someone permanently dies (which as pointed out in another thread is extremely hard to do), or doesn't want to play that character anymore, work with them to create a character that will work in the game. I think pre-made characters can be an enjoyable experience.

 

[Starglim]

I've found that pre-generated characters, or passing a former player's character to a new player, are often needful to manage the game (due to limited time or events already in motion) and present a chance to play aspects that the player wouldn't have chosen for himself. In the long term it's a big hit to the player's loyalty to the character, though.

I don't agree with the GM designing a party of characters specifically to have story events or pre-assigned conflicts happen to particular characters. That's just setting yourself up for such a scheme to fail because the player isn't interested in playing out that story.

 

[IronWolf]

I have not had this happen to me. I would find it very difficult to get into a character that was forced on me. I have a much easier time role playing a character if *I* was the one that created him.

 

[Sir Elton]

As an Actor, I had characters handed to me on a silver platter. Here's the character you play, the director would say. And I try hard to get into that role and usually I was successful at it.

When I'm playing a Roleplaying Game, I usually make my characters, and I'm playing the character no differently than myself. I think I like stage acting a little better, but I'll stick to creating my own character for an RPG. Although I'll play myself most of the time, it wierds everyone out if I gave it some "gusto."

Playing Dungeons and Dragons is great, but people find it very weird if you disappear into your character. Not that I wouldn't play another character type that the DM gave me, mind you. Just my observations on how people reacted to persons who are able to disappear into their roles.

 

[Mark Oliva]

Mixed Reaction Explanation

I run an epic campaign - one that runs several years - where each player is allowed to make two reserve PCs. When all three get killed, the players has to choose among a group of new reserve PCs that I created and that suit specific needs of the campaign. The main reason I did this was to get the players to be more careful with their PCs. Some were quite willing to let their PCs risk everything, knowing they always could create a new PC. Others burned PCs now and then to intentionally create a new one. In the current system, the players are indeed more careful, and they also accumulate resources now to make resurrections, etc., possible. The system gives the players the negative reaction they should have when they burn a character, because they know the next PC won't be their own creation. On the other hand, it lets me plug the hole left by a dead PC with a new PC of about the same level. That's important, because low level characters replacing higher level PCs bog down the kind of campaign we're running. No player ever has had big problems with the reserve PC he/she has chosen, and one player admits quite readily his best PCs where pre-generated reserves rather than characters he created himself. On the other hand, the whole group would tell you that they'd rather make their own reserve PCs.

 

[Laslo Tremaine]

I think pre-generated characters are fine for one-shots, and mini-campaigns.

For a longer game, I vastly prefer to make my own character...

 

[Crothian]

I've never played or forced a chareacter on anyone. I" have suggested characters for people but in the end it is always their choice.

 

[Jdvn1]

I've played a game where everyone starts with amnesia. We didn't know our own stats until we tried to do something and discovered how skilled we were.

Most people thought it was fun. Especially towards the end when we were like, "I wanna try dancing. How good am I? Quick, give me something to sail!"