Let's Talk About Defining Player Characters

[Reynard]

Have you played / read either Shadow of the Demon Lord / Weird Wizard? Their career based character development is very interesting.

I own SotDL and skimmed it when I thought I was going to able to convince my group to play it. I should read it in more depth.

 

[aramis erak]

[NOTE: this is another thread in my ongoing series to explore and discuss various aspects of TTRPGs as I work toward a foundation for my own RPG. Thanks for participating. Even if we disagree it will be helpful.]

There are lots of ways to define PCs in TTRPGs, from classes and levels to skill based systems to tags and descriptors, not to mention games that combine these in different ways. And of course lots of RPGs use their own jargon to rename, redefine, and refocus any or all of these elements.

So how do you feel about the different ways PCs are defined in roleplaying games? Do you like clear archetypes like classes? Do you prefer an a la cart approach? What about "point buy" versus "rolled" attributes or whatever? Does it matter what genre the game is in? How does the way we define PCs impact play?

Part and parcel with defining the PCs is "leveling up" -- that is, character advancement. So let's talk about this here, too.

Thanks!

My preference is for purchased abilities, with atts, skills, and maybe special abilities (I like L5R 5e better than all earlier L5R, and earlier L5R better than ANY D&D).
I don't mind classes provided they just set costs for skills and powers, á la Alternity or Rolemaster, or set what purchased advancements count for access to further abilities (L5R5). Or in WWG games where it sets only the range of special abilities one can purchase.
I like at least 4, no more than 11, attributes, and prefer strength and health be on different attributes.
I like best games with 16 to 25 skills, but open ended specialization within those. I can handle YZE typical 12,,, but it feels a bit low.

 

[BenjaminPey]

My preference goes to words. Organized by themes, as seen in City of Mist, Otherscape and Legend in the Mist, it's ideal. But the simplified version one could see in Lady Blackbird works, too.
Framed like that, character evolution takes another meaning, one that I prefer, because it feels real. The characters evolve, they change with the fiction, according to it. They don't simply get better with more skills and powers and better stats (and often they don't get better, they simply change).

The "concept" of the Cypher System is a bit barebone but quite handy if you're in a hurry: I'm an adjective noun who verb.

Otherwise, when I want to play a fantasy story of small characters who rise up to the challenge, zero to hero, in other words when progression, rather than evolution, is the goal, classes and levels all the way.

 

[Retros_x]

As much as the kid in me loves rolled stats, when you do that, unless you've got some really trustworthy players, you're going to have people showing up to play with their highest stat of 11 and someone with no stat lower than 14.

Half the fun of rolling is rolling at the table with everyone involved! At least thats why I do in games where we roll.

Slow scaling of the baseline features acquired at character creation (15-20% times increase in potency or frequency every 4-5 “levels”), primarily magic item progression, and unlockable boons/feats/“prestige classes” would be my ideal. Not necessarily all the options in the game, of course, unless it’s a pretty crunchy game.

This sounds intriguing, do you have a system that fullfills this vision of complex creation and simple/roguelike feature based progression?

I know folks hate the word immersion, but I feel like defined characters adds to the setting you are looking to play in. So, as a system is built, I think if the definitions lead to characters that are easy to envision in such a world or place helps aid gaming mindset of everyone at the table. I definitely "build" characters around the concepts I want to explore in the genre, and find a hard time getting into the experience in generic classless systems that are made to be one size fits all.

Absolutely agree. Tropes and clichés work very well in TTRPG because they give an easy reference/frame for the players that they can use as a baseline for roleplay. Thats why - to not only ask questions, but answer the threads question - I definitely prefer classes that have distinct gameplay and a distinct feel and are based on tropes and archetypes. You can always add a twist or subversion to it if you want.

 

[TwoSix]

This sounds intriguing, do you have a system that fullfills this vision of complex creation and simple/roguelike feature based progression?

I wish I did! Most games with rogue-like progression I've found are OSR/NSR games with simple resolution engines (I'm thinking games like Cairn and Knave here). Most crunchy games feature increasing player-facing decision choices all throughout the leveling process (which makes sense, considering those games are generally focused on empowering player choices).

I'm reasonably sure I'm the only person whose tastes lean this way.

 

[Tigris]

I wish I did! Most games with rogue-like progression I've found are OSR/NSR games with simple resolution engines (I'm thinking games like Cairn and Knave here). Most crunchy games feature increasing player-facing decision choices all throughout the leveling process (which makes sense, considering those games are generally focused on empowering player choices).

I'm reasonably sure I'm the only person whose tastes lean this way.

Well it depends a bit on how exactly you define character progression and how you define items, but Beacon (and with this Lancer from which it is inspired) comes to mind: (The images used below are example pages from here: BEACON TTRPG by Pirate Gonzalez Games )

• You choose a class as your base (but you can later switch it when you unlock others if you want, but you are not forced).
  • Classes are relative simple but well defined as shown here: https://img.itch.zone/aW1hZ2UvMTE2MDE1Ny8xNDM1Nzc0NS5wbmc=/original/kjWBLp.png
• You have some base values given by the class, and can add some points on top of it yourself
  • This also defines what kind of equipment and how much you can carry
• You choose 3 feats (like being better with weapon types) in the beginning
• You choose a race in the beginning.
  • They are also simple with 4 features here: https://img.itch.zone/aW1hZ2UvMTE2MDE1Ny8xNDM1NzczOC5wbmc=/original/pp56f1.png

Then as you level up:

• You gain new class levels (max 3 per class), but they only unlock additional equipment you can select (spells are also equiped as well as passives)
  • If its the first level of a class you also get that base class (so you could switch)
• You also get loot (items, spells, passive to equip) from adventuring
• You get some sparingly stat increases as you level up, but its not that much power you gain by that
• You also gain 1 more feat per level, and can also use this feat to level an existing one up (max 3)

When you go to a new adventure you:

• Select any of the classes you have unlocked
• Then select spells, passives, weapons and equipment from ones you have unlocked through classes, from basic equipment and from loot you personally found, to equip your character for the adventure.
• You can also get some small adaptions to items and or buffs, if you have unlocked it in your village (you spend gold to improve your village and get better shops etc.)
• You select 1 out of the 4 features of your race

And then you go like this to your adventure.


I know its not exactly what you had in mind, but it goes a bit in this direction at least, to just show 1 non OSR game, which is mostly about equipment (even though you get quite a bit through character levels).

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Here's a little thought experiment. Consider how you generate characters in any roleplaying system. What questions do you answer about your character when selecting specific features or choices?

A lot of games follow the D&D standard: Who you are (Species), who you were (Background), and who you want to be (Class).

Species tells you who (or what) your character is in purest form. It sets your baseline, usually by adjusting stats and adding a unique feature or ability. Ironically, this core decision rarely plays a factor in your character's identity and portrayal during actual play outside of the mechanical benefits and features granted.

Background gives you a few perks or bonuses that your character carries over from their previous experience. Oddly, you don't see many direct options to continue that path as part of your character's continuing development or growth, unless it fits into your new path.

Class is essentially a path of who your character wants to be. It isn't just the uniform they wear, but a progression to someone they actually want to become. Rarely does a player think "I want my character to be a level 1 blank."

And sometimes, players want to take multiple or unusual paths just to become something different than what the standard paths prescribe. However, without baseline models to define what the standards are, there is no reference point to determine the extent of their deviation.

Some people want to play the best warrior in the land. Others don't want to be called a warrior; they just want the awesome warrior stats, warrior bonuses, and warrior abilities to beat the best warrior in the land without being told how to do it.

If you look at other systems (or one you're trying to build for yourself), how do they work differently? Do they answer these three basic questions with similar options? Do they ask different questions that are more important to the game itself? What else can be used for players to show who their characters are, who they were, and who they're trying to be?

Personally, I like a system that shows me how to become a warrior in the land, and then allows me to make my own warrior without a prescription. Don't sell me an endless variety of options when there is only a couple choices that the system requires or expects me to make.

I don't like systems that change their complexity just to facilitate a sense of accomplishment or progression. A lot of these games are fun until they reach a certain level largely because the numbers and options get increasingly more complicated. My preference is for horizontal growth (improved options, bounded numbers) over vertical growth (more options, escalating numbers).

Lastly, a simple class system will suffice if the system has the flexibility and depth to allow decisions made during play to matter more than choices made long ago on your character sheet.