D&D 5E On rulings, rules, and Twitter, or: How Sage Advice Changed

[Lanefan]

Not to sound overly snobby (but I'm going to), if you haven't learned how to properly characterize your PC after multiple years of playing, you're just going to stay in the novice category for me.

If the character never develops any "character" during its played career, I'm somewhat in agreement here.

But if you're saying you expect the character's entire personality etc. to be fully formed right out of the gate, then no. It has to be given time-in-play to develop, and for in-game events to be able to (maybe) shape it.

 

[mrpopstar]

As for an anecdote applicable to the other end of the spectrum, an approach to personal characteristics that can be explained in the span of a single page helps to reel people in.

Spark your imagination but stay grounded. The game of Dungeons & Dragons expects far less than is implied by the contributions being made to this thread.

 

[jayoungr]

But as soon as the game insists I choose one from each of several lists for my character during char-gen, thus implying that I'm then bound to those choices* later: no thanks, I'm out.

Doesn't your GM let you swap them out as your character's circumstances change or as you get to know the character better? Every GM I've ever played with would do so.

* - and if I'm not bound to them, why make me choose them in the first place?

Just to sketch in the character's personality and give you something to work with, which may change. Also, depending on your GM, to provide a chance for you to get inspiration by using the BIFTs.

 

[Thomas Shey]

We both agree there is no one true way. But some ways are still better than others. If you can't see how both can be true, I can't help.

I can see both can be true. I just consider the latter meaningless in an sort of objective sense.

 

[Oofta]

What's an example of something that's better but less enjoyable?

Ooh! Ooh! Can I answer this one?

I had a guy who was great at RP. Really got into his character, method actor, the whole nine yards. Always played an anti-social loner and jerk who held petty grievances for slights real and imagined.

Was he "better" at bringing his character to life? Absolutely. Was he fun to play with? Not really, I got tired of it after a while. At first I just thought it was this PC and then the next one was just the same. I don't need all the players sitting around singing kum-ba-ya while holding hands, but I have enough stress without petty squabbles in-game.

 

[Malmuria]

Maze Rats is a great example of how to start off a PC with some keywords for their physical appearance, clothing, personality, and background. It takes 5 minutes and works as a jumping off point rather than anything determinative. Alternatively, I would ask my players to fill out the following

• Physical appearance: 2 adjectives + signature item of clothing
• Personality: 3 adjectives
• Backstory: 2-3 bullet points, <100 words
• What does your character want?
• What does your character not want?

 

[Lanefan]

Doesn't your GM let you swap them out as your character's circumstances change or as you get to know the character better? Every GM I've ever played with would do so.

Doesn't matter. If they're that flexible then why make me choose them up front? Why can't I let them emerge organically as play goes along?

Just to sketch in the character's personality and give you something to work with, which may change. Also, depending on your GM, to provide a chance for you to get inspiration by using the BIFTs.

Non-starter for me; as I'd never want to play in (or run) a system that used meta-currency (e.g. Inspiration). The very idea is rather abhorrent to me, and IMO is one of 5e's (surprisingly few, overall) really glaring mistakes.

And the sketching-in can be achieved simply by having a non-binding list that a player can look at for ideas. My point is that as soon as the game forces me to choose, those choices are either a) binding or b) a waste of time.

 

[Lanefan]

Maze Rats is a great example of how to start off a PC with some keywords for their physical appearance, clothing, personality, and background. It takes 5 minutes and works as a jumping off point rather than anything determinative. Alternatively, I would ask my players to fill out the following

• Physical appearance: 2 adjectives + signature item of clothing
• Personality: 3 adjectives
• Backstory: 2-3 bullet points, <100 words
• What does your character want?
• What does your character not want?

Fine as long as none of it, other than physical appearance, is binding once play begins.

Physical appearance - gender, height, weight, skin-hair-eye colours, etc. - is quite important and, depending on the setting and-or how the game goes, can quickly have in-fiction repercussions*. Thus, of all of these it's the one thing that really should be nailed down before the character enters play.

* - for example, a 5'3"-tall person will find it far easier to move normally in a 5'6"-high space than will a 6'4" person; by the same token, that 6'4" person will be able to melee-hit a creature hanging 9 feet above the floor far easier than will the 5'3" person.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Fine as long as none of it, other than physical appearance, is binding once play begins.

Physical appearance - gender, height, weight, skin-hair-eye colours, etc. - is quite important and, depending on the setting and-or how the game goes, can quickly have in-fiction repercussions*. Thus, of all of these it's the one thing that really should be nailed down before the character enters play.

* - for example, a 5'3"-tall person will find it far easier to move normally in a 5'6"-high space than will a 6'4" person; by the same token, that 6'4" person will be able to melee-hit a creature hanging 9 feet above the floor far easier than will the 5'3" person.

What kind of games are you playing a 1 foot difference in height has substantial mechanical effects on gameplay???

The Narrativist revolution cannot come soon enough.

 

[jayoungr]

Doesn't matter. If they're that flexible then why make me choose them up front? Why can't I let them emerge organically as play goes along?

Well honestly, if you were at my table, I'd probably let you do that too. I might poke you to fill in something after a few sessions, though.

Non-starter for me; as I'd never want to play in (or run) a system that used meta-currency (e.g. Inspiration). The very idea is rather abhorrent to me, and IMO is one of 5e's (surprisingly few, overall) really glaring mistakes.

I'm not a fan of inspiration either. Not because I object to meta-currency, but because I hate the feeling of begging for approval-cookies. Thankfully, it's easy to ignore.

And the sketching-in can be achieved simply by having a non-binding list that a player can look at for ideas. My point is that as soon as the game forces me to choose, those choices are either a) binding or b) a waste of time.

So are you saying you'd be okay with a list that a player can look at for ideas? Because the way I use it, that's basically what the BIFTs are, especially in the early sessions.