Should PCs Be Exceptional?

I'm afraid I'm going to have to say that it depends too much on genre and setting for me to answer generically. I know that's unsatisfactory, but its how I feel about it.

An alternative way to ask this question is to ask when a PC should be considered exceptional.

- At the time of character creation. PCs are inherently special. (e.g. most PbtA, most superhero games)

- Not at the very beginning (Level 1), but reasonably quickly after they've been around the block a couple of times (Level 7ish). (e.g. D&D 5E).

- Not until they've done some serious growth and powered up a lot (Level 15ish). (e.g. D&D 3E, most WEG d6 games)

- Never inherently by beefed up numbers on a character sheet; only when they manage to do exceptional things. (e.g. Zweihander, Dread).

- Lemon curry. (e.g. Free Kriegsspiel)

--

My preference is for option #3 above. I also can enjoy #2 and #4. I have pretty low interest in #1 and #5.

Scribe said:

Anyway, what do folks think is the more important lesson to impart?

1. Some people are just born special.
2. With effort, you can make yourself into whatever you want.

Click to expand...

Both at once.

And it's done by having randomly-generated stats - those who are "born special" have higher stats across the board than the average and quite possibly higher stats then their PC peers.

And then the "make something out of it" piece comes in. You can have the highest stats you want but if you die in your second combat then they didn't matter much, did they? Meanwhile, the underdog PC who started with very bland stats might just keep chuggin' along and make himself into something quite special indeed.

Deset Gled said:

An alternative way to ask this question is to ask when a PC should be considered exceptional.

- At the time of character creation. PCs are inherently special. (e.g. most PbtA, most superhero games)

- Not at the very beginning (Level 1), but reasonably quickly after they've been around the block a couple of times (Level 7ish). (e.g. D&D 5E).

- Not until they've done some serious growth and powered up a lot (Level 15ish). (e.g. D&D 3E, most WEG d6 games)

- Never inherently by beefed up numbers on a character sheet; only when they manage to do exceptional things. (e.g. Zweihander, Dread).

- Lemon curry. (e.g. Free Kriegsspiel)

--

My preference is for option #3 above. I also can enjoy #2 and #4. I have pretty low interest in #1 and #5.

Click to expand...

I'd go with the third one on that list - if they do have to be or become special, at least put it off until they've earned it.

Lanefan said:

Both at once.

And it's done by having randomly-generated stats - those who are "born special" have higher stats across the board than the average and quite possibly higher stats then their PC peers.

And then the "make something out of it" piece comes in. You can have the highest stats you want but if you die in your second combat then they didn't matter much, did they? Meanwhile, the underdog PC who started with very bland stats might just keep chuggin' along and make himself into something quite special indeed.

Click to expand...

The old classic. High stats lead to overconfidence, lead to death.

For games where the PCs' occupation is "adventurer," I like the idea that the PCs are not exceptionally gifted, they're exceptionally foolish. Adventuring is dangerous business, and while in principle any old farmer could try to be an adventurer, most farmers are sane enough to recognize that adventures often end in death. The ones who don't recognize that are usually dead. The PCs are the ones who were crazy enough to try and lucky enough to survive.

I vote “typical, but in the upper quartile”

I like the PCs to be exceptional because I like asymmetrical design for RPGs, The PCs should work on a different paradigm to most NPCs; how different and what that difference is can vary by game. In Savage Worlds for example, the PCs are Wild Cards while most NPCs are Extras, and that makes the game a better play experience for me. In the new DaggerHeart RPG player actions generate Hope and Fear and are resolved on a 2d12 mechanism while NPC actions are resolved with a d20 and don’t usually generate meta currency.

This provides two strong benefits in my opinion.

First, PCs are intended to have much more ’spotlight time’ across many different scenes and encounters. They are also run by a player on a 1:1 basis. So they warrant complexity and it adds to the game. Most NPCs will only be in one or two scenes, and the GM will be running many of them at the same time. So they warrant less complexity and need less depth to still deliver what is needed from them in the game.

Second, by running the PCs and NPCs on slightly different mechanical sets is frees up the cast of NPCs to be much more diverse. You no longer have to think through how this particular NPC’s abilities would be modelled using PC mechanics or rules. Even highly simulationist games like GURPS do this, with ‘character points are for PCs’ as a design principle - just give the NPC the scores and abilities that make sense for them rather than labouring through the detailed mechanics for PC creation.

So, I like my PCs to be exceptional by design.

PCs also tend to be exceptional in what they do, in my experience. ‘Slice of life’ games are a thing, sure, but they don’t personally excite me.