GMs - What type of PCs would you like to see in your game?

[Lwaxy]

The kitchen sink poll made me wonder if anyone else has ever asked their GM what type of thing they would like their players to try, or if you have given your players a list of ideas before.

Right now I don't have wish list, but until recently, I really wanted a drow in an evil campaign. You know, when players try to make good drow over and over and then you plan out a short evil campaign and you get not a single drow. So I mentioned the fact and got an all drow party for that campaign

The list I recently got from my cousin for his next campaign included a drunken monk/master, a paranoid priest of any chaotic god and any class with a phobia of butterflies. Seems those things would fit right into the planned story. I think I'll take up the drunken monk

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

My favorite PCs- at least from the viewpoint of launching the campaign- are the ones where the players actively try to tie the PC into the campaign world. Not only does this help me as the DM, I personally think it helps the other players.

The best EVER for me was when I ran a supers game set in 1900...and every player utterly nailed it.

 

[Ringlerun]

Years ago i ran a few games were the players took actors and i made up character rolls from which they could choose from. It was all B grade comedy horror stuff so whoever had his actor survive till the end credits was doing well. I made up some cards that the players could use to get extra screen time, stunt double, extra take and so forth. It was quite fun and interesting but not sure how it would have gone in the long run we only did a hand full of games.

 

[Rechan]

I love the motivated player, the ambitious one that sets goals and says "This is what I want", pursues it, and I set up the dominos for them to knock down. I should specify that goal is typically not "I want to be super broken" or "this specific artifact" but like, "I want to topple that country" or "I want to take on this big-bad of the setting" or even, "This area of setting Y has problem X. I want to solve that problem..

That type of player is pure gold. Because the adventures write themselves, with the player pre-hooked.

As far as characters? No. Well. I'd really enjoy running a campaign themed around an organizational buy-in. Like everyone is a member of the mafia/thieves guild/church/etc.

 

[Mallus]

I want engaged and entertained players. Other than that, surprise me.

 

[S'mon]

The kitchen sink poll made me wonder if anyone else has ever asked their GM what type of thing they would like their players to try, or if you have given your players a list of ideas before.

I tried to indicate I wanted Conanesque Swords & Sorcery heroes for my Southlands campaign. Apparently I did a very poor job, since the only Conanesque PCs in the game are/were pregens I handed out myself. It almost seemed like players were actively avoiding the archetype. Instead I got lots and lots of Warlocks.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Characters that are proactive, tie in to the campaign world, and have relationships to each other.

 

[kitsune9]

When I ran a FR game, when they came out with Races of Faerun, I let my players choose characters from the book if they wanted to. One player had a Tanarukk Barbarian. Interesting character.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm more about what I don't want rather than what I do. Specifically:

• No joke characters. Games tend to provide plenty of comic relief on their own, in my experience. It works better if a character concept isn't a poor and tiresome joke to begin with. Closely related to this: no joke names.
  
• No unmotivated loners. I prefer to tie my characters together with shared backstory. I've even got a shortish exercise cribbed from Spirit of the Century that accomplishes this brilliantly. I like characters who already have some ties to each other and to the setting, and who can "hit the ground running" so to speak with roleplaying opportunities. And while I don't mind some uncharacteristic or non-altruistic motivations, I don't like characters who refuse to engage with any potential adventure possibilities in the name of "roleplaying." If your answer to everything is, "my character wouldn't be interested in this" then you probably need to come up with a different character. I'm certainly willing to work with you on stuff that's up your character's alley, but you've also gotta work with the group and follow along with what's going on otherwise.
  
• Also don't like the opposite. Characters who are natural spotlight hogs, who tend to have their fingers in everything (including some specialty of another character) can end up saturating the game with their presence in a way that isn't very fun. Although, to be honest, that's more of a player issue than a character issue, most of the time.
  
• Lots of people don't like evil PCs. I prefer the opposite approach--goody-two shoes characters cause me more grief in general than evil PCs. Actually, I mostly just do away with alignment altogether and then encourage the players to create real scoundrely characters if desired. Then I put them in compromising situations.

 

[steenan]

I want PCs that:
- have ties to NPCs and cultures of the setting that motivate them
- have their beliefs and goals they are ready to fight for
- have their emotional weaknesses they need to work on
- have the right amount of originality to fit the setting without being boring
- work together without forgetting their differences