In a case like that, it's a DM's job to enforce the consequences of breaking his oath...OR the party to figure out he was never a Paladin to start off with in the first place. 
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Highly detailed PC personalities?
- Thread starter Jon_Dahl
- Start date
Argyle King
Legend
In a case like that, it's a DM's job to enforce the consequences of breaking his oath...OR the party to figure out he was never a Paladin to start off with in the first place.
Sure; except he most certainly was a paladin. The DM could have done something, but didn't feel like it was worth the trouble.
Anyone else remember some of the old 3rd edition forums over at the WoTC site where there were people trying to argue that raping enemies and burning down orphanages could be good aligned acts?
Personally, like I said; I too like to leave it to the players. I also do my best to avoid douchebaggery when choosing people to game with. Those two ideas tend to serve me well. During times when they don't, it's nice to have a fallback option. Beyond that, if you're going to roleplay the traits anyway, you might as well get the points for them, right? Occasionally it's nice to not know exactly how the story might go too. Maybe Kurbads slays the 9-Headed Ogre; maybe he decides to harass the busty bar maiden instead.
Ahnehnois
First Post
Having done some work in the field of psychological assessment, I can tell you that trying to define what makes a person who they are using numbers does not work.
The best thing D&D (or most rpgs) can do is use rules to simulate the outcomes of objectively describable actions and create an engaging game experience, while staying out of the way of the roleplaying part. Some personality traits can be made into mechanics like traits, but this doesn't always go well.
The best thing D&D (or most rpgs) can do is use rules to simulate the outcomes of objectively describable actions and create an engaging game experience, while staying out of the way of the roleplaying part. Some personality traits can be made into mechanics like traits, but this doesn't always go well.
ReportedhabrielaCriss
has no status.
Registered User
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6
Novice (Lvl 1)
delericho
Legend
Yeah, I'm firmly in the "leave it to the players" camp.
Actually, at the outset of a campaign, I prefer that players don't go into too much detail about their character's personality (and background) - I prefer they leave it quite a bit open so that the events of the campaign can shape things as they go. If nothing else, that tends to allow for character growth, where writing it down can have the effect of locking the personality so that it never changes.
Actually, at the outset of a campaign, I prefer that players don't go into too much detail about their character's personality (and background) - I prefer they leave it quite a bit open so that the events of the campaign can shape things as they go. If nothing else, that tends to allow for character growth, where writing it down can have the effect of locking the personality so that it never changes.
The Red King
First Post
1. Bob Ross is dead.
2. Play any damn way you like. It is YOUR game.
3. I keep notes on all of my own characters as I play each one differently. My players right now dont play them much differently than they would act if they were really there, so I don't keep notes on thier characters. When I want to know how Gabriel and Holden's characters are going to react, I just say "How would Holden and Gabriel react to...."
2. Play any damn way you like. It is YOUR game.
3. I keep notes on all of my own characters as I play each one differently. My players right now dont play them much differently than they would act if they were really there, so I don't keep notes on thier characters. When I want to know how Gabriel and Holden's characters are going to react, I just say "How would Holden and Gabriel react to...."
But his preferred tool, the almighty fan-brush "Treebringer"*, lives on...
* it's not really a brush, but an elemental trapped in fan-brush form.
Kichwas
Half-breed
I used to be a big proponent of highly detailed PC personalities and background descriptions. I've even had rules in days gone by requiring a certain number of -pages- of backstory, and for some massive long form about traits to be filled in fully.
But frankly - how often in game does that note about 'is very whimsical' come up in play and shape the way the character actually ends up being roleplayed.
Maybe it does for some.
But since 1981, I can count the number of times on less than one finger... ie, it ain't happened.
And I've seen some great roleplayers go on to play highly detailed and engaging characters that were very different from what they played last, or played in another simultaneous game, and stay consistent with it.
I now feel its much better to let it all happen organically. Show up with a blank slate, and an open mind about how the game will unfold.
Some of the best PCs I've been witness too had nothing, until some event in game, usually in an early session, caused the player to get that light in their eyes and respond - and next thing we knew the entire campaign had a new focus as that character and maybe a few others came alive.
This is true for the GM as well some times. If you craft some amazingly complex 23-chapter, 57-part storyline, with 100-page essays on each major NPC, and so on... and then on day one, the players go left...
- You're screwed.
Better to have an open mind, a short intro plot and adventure, and wing yourself into that epic novella as a response to the vibe in the room.
At least that's the point I've come to.
But frankly - how often in game does that note about 'is very whimsical' come up in play and shape the way the character actually ends up being roleplayed.
Maybe it does for some.
But since 1981, I can count the number of times on less than one finger... ie, it ain't happened.
And I've seen some great roleplayers go on to play highly detailed and engaging characters that were very different from what they played last, or played in another simultaneous game, and stay consistent with it.
I now feel its much better to let it all happen organically. Show up with a blank slate, and an open mind about how the game will unfold.
Some of the best PCs I've been witness too had nothing, until some event in game, usually in an early session, caused the player to get that light in their eyes and respond - and next thing we knew the entire campaign had a new focus as that character and maybe a few others came alive.
This is true for the GM as well some times. If you craft some amazingly complex 23-chapter, 57-part storyline, with 100-page essays on each major NPC, and so on... and then on day one, the players go left...
- You're screwed.
Better to have an open mind, a short intro plot and adventure, and wing yourself into that epic novella as a response to the vibe in the room.
At least that's the point I've come to.
Bloodstone Press
Explorer
One system that does that very well, IMO, is chapter 2 of the Book of Broken Dreams.
Its not really intended for PCs, but you can use it that way. Its intended for NPCs development.
