How do you build your characters?

[Mentat55]

I tend to do one of two things:

1. If the campaign has a strong theme, I try to think of character concepts that fit that theme, and then decide on race/class/feat combinations that best express that concept.

2. If there is not a strong theme, or there is a great deal of inclusivity (Eberron and the Forgotten Realms come to mind), I oftentimes choose a character based on something I have wanted to try -- and that something can be a concept or a mechanic (or set of mechanics).

I would say #1 is a bit more flavor-driven, while #2 tends to appeal to my min-maxing instincts.

 

[d2OKC]

You & me both- minis often form a key ingredient in my PC design...AND ongoing development.

And like you, my thousands are a resource open for use by the Kherson in my group.

Good to see I'm not completely crazy! I think the other guys I play with (who all happen to be very good friends of mine) kind of roll their eyes at me when I insist they select a mini to represent their character, but it is so much easier for me to get into the game if I have something interesting and, at least relatively, accurate in front of me.

It is certainly not a requirement to play the game, and I understand most people not wanting to make the investment, but for it is extremely helpful.

 

[Riastlin]

For me, I usually start with a very general concept, often little more than class and/or race. From there I try to puzzle out what exactly makes the character tick (does he prefer ranged combat? is he a skill monkey? does he hate orcs?, etc.). After that, I just tend to sort of pick options as I go based on what fits the character and the needs of the party.

I do though tend to be a little more conscious of not being the square peg in large part because I usually DM and so I understand the difficulties that can arise when one PC doesn't fit well into the rest, or when one PC is maybe a bit too strong, etc. In the game I'm currently a player in for instance, my runepriest pretty quickly started to be the main damage dealer (even more than the ranger). This was mainly due to the other players (particularly the ranger) being much more casual and not as concerned with min/maxing, etc.

So, over the last couple of levels I have started to pick options that are not so much sub-optional as they are geared toward some other schtick. I had, for instance, been considering multiclassing into barbarian -- which would have upped my damage even more one encounter each day -- but instead decided to go with Mark of Healing. I'm now looking at possibly going with Rune Feats or else just skill-based feats in order to let the rest of the party sort of catch up. The other players didn't really complain, but at the same time they would make comments like "I thought you were supposed to be a leader, not a striker." Always good-natured but I still didn't want to start over shadowing the other players.

To the OP I guess I would ask, in what way is the player in question building a square peg? Is it simply a matter of alignment or deity worship? Or is it more a min-max vs. casual issue? Depending on the nature of his "squareishness" is might not be a big deal.

/shrug

 

[KidSnide]

I usually look at what character-role hasn't been taken and what mechanical role is missing and try to create a character that fits. For example, if the party is travelling to a foreign land but they lack a local contact, I might decide to be that local contact. Learn a bit from the GM, and I figure out that the local city is run by a counsel of spice merchants -- so the character becomes an up-and-coming young leader in one of the major spice houses.

As the party lacks a controller and I hadn't played with an invoker yet, I built an invoker and convinced the GM that it would be fair (and fit better for the character) if his powers worked off Cha instead of Wis. And there you go: a handsome, smooth-talking, Erathis-devoted merchant with a bit of a Trump-esque temper.

-KS

 

[babinro]

I look through the book to find a Paragon Path whose style I'd like to take advantage of or maximize. Then all choices are based around that path...including class, race, feats and magical items and role play tend to fall into place naturally from there.

 

[Quickleaf]

Interesting responses so far!

Unfortunately there is one player who has a knack for creating square peg characters and who tries to force them into the round hole of campaigns. I'm trying my best to accommodate him but on the flip-side, I'm seeing no reciprocation from his end to work towards a compromise where his character will work in the campaign.

Hey I've played with that guy! IME "lovable jerkoff instigator" is appropriate, frequently overlapping with "defaults to the same character archetype every time."

Over the years, I've found that when creating characters, that for me it is not as simple as having an idea and building to suit it. For me there is an organic process of evolution and adaption and creative inspiration that moulds, shapes and forms the final result. That result may even entirely differ from the initial concept, but regardless, through the process of creation I've become attached to it and excited about playing it and seeing it develop.

Back when we played 2e I had a player who was all about character development thru play, and he'd get annoyed with my questions about backstory and character motivation because he looked forward to finding those out.

Regardless, I'm curious to know how others go about creating characters. Is the process of creation something you care little about? Click a few buttons randomly in a character creation program and you're done? Can you pick up anyone else's character at a moment's notice and have fun playing it? Or do you spend inordinate amounts of time fussing over minor details, trying to get everything 'just right'? Does the setting inform your character choices or do you play "Bob the Fighter" in any setting, from Space Cadets to Guns'n'Garters?

Mostly I've DMed, maybe in my life I've played 5 PCs. So I have a lot less experience than other players on these boards. I've also jumped into a game in the shoes of an NPC (which I would still consider an act of character creation, just not mechanically).

I am also one of those who prefers to link his character to the world/campaign and to the rest of the party. For me that's the most inspiring step, and I wish more groups I've played with would spend the first session making characters together, or at least do so informally. It just makes the rest of the game so much smoother.

One trick I've picked up is giving the DM a bullet points format character background calling out potential plot threads the DM might want to draw on or manipulate. This includes my character's secrets, both those he knows about and those unknown to him. From the outset differentiating between what I know and what my character knows helps keep me from meta-gaming too much.

And usually I finish making a character by finding and painting a mini. It's an old hobby of mine that I just don't have time for, but when I play a PC I look forward to busting out my old paints

 

[the Jester]

It depends on the system.

My preferred method goes Roll for stats in order, then brainstorm a pc based on that, but not all games use stat-rolling.

 

[KidSnide]

There's a lot of variety, but I think the single most important thing to do when building a character is to think about the game to be played, and build a character appropriate for that game. Everything else is an implementation detail.

-KS

 

[Kzach]

I am also one of those who prefers to link his character to the world/campaign and to the rest of the party. For me that's the most inspiring step, and I wish more groups I've played with would spend the first session making characters together, or at least do so informally. It just makes the rest of the game so much smoother.

OMG yes!

One of the reasons I was inspired to run a Neverwinter campaign was because of the Neverwinter themes. The themes ARE the campaign. They are what ties all the PC's together and gives them all motivations and connections to the setting so that they're not just playing through "Generic Fantasy Setting #42".

I've said to my players that they can basically have carte blanche access to everything in the Character Builder to make their characters with only ONE exception; their character HAS to have a Neverwinter theme.

If I could've said, "Come together and discuss your character's backstories and how the character's individually, or together, have strong ties to the Neverwinter Campaign Setting," I would've just done that.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Depends. It depends a lot on what I think is new and shiney, or if there's a particular concept I want to try out.

My minotaur battle cleric was meant to be a quasi-striker paired with a defender to serve as the core of the party, since the other party members tended to be, ahem, flakey. I took minotaur (the MM version) since I could use a oversized weapon, which helped jack up his damage reasonably. He actually wound up being the only character to stay in the campaign from 1 - 26, though he was rebuilt as a warpriest at 21.

For our Eberron game, I started with a bugbear rogue, mostly for the oversized weapon cheese. About 10th level, when it became obvious that wasn't intended to be used as a PC race, I switched to an elf avenger. Then, at 21st, because I saw how many monsters had unavoidable aoe damage around them, I switched to a storm sorcerer.

For our ongoing Dark Sun game, I initially started as an eladrin psion. However, the bard's healing seemed subpar, and I didn't really grok the psion, so I switched over to a genasi warlord.


For a future game post-Dark Sun (or "dammit we want to play divine characters), one of the players wants us to try doing a Radiant Mafia type group. Right now I'd actually like to try out Blackguard, I think I can get it to work pretty well.

Brad