Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SKyOdin" data-source="post: 4824314" data-attributes="member: 57939">First off Jack7, there are two issues with your writing that I need to get out of the way first. Please bear in mind that I am only offering these as constructive criticism, so that you can improve your writing in the future.1) Your writing style is way too verbose. While your essay is almost 4,000 words long, your basic point is pretty simple and straight-forward. You probably could have made your point in as little as 500 words, maybe 1000. Every writing teacher I have ever had has emphasized the importance of being concise. As it is, your essay is so wordy that I am having trouble reading it.2) I suggest that you drop the "Interactive Essay" concept. I read the blog post you linked to, and to be honest both the idea that you invented this concept and that this is something more than a post on a message-board come off as being very pretentious. Despite your intentions, this is still just a thread on ENWorld, and you can't do anything to change the way people post.Now then, on to your arguments. As far as I can gather, you make five major arguments:1) Most characters in roleplaying games are created without consideration for their family history, and the effect that family history would have on the character.2) Family history is an integral part of most of human literature.3) Adding in more developed backgrounds for PCs and incorporating elements of those backgrounds into campaigns would make RPGs more fun.4) Currently, no version of D&D does anything to support the creation of detailed family histories.5) Game designers (and the makers of D&D in particular) should add in more support for this kind of character detail.Now then, I generally agree with point number three. I for one love having PCs who have families (preferably living families), family histories, inherited property, and so on. That is why I plan on using an idea my brother utilized before, and having every player fill out a questionnaire that asks about such background details.On the other hand, I have some serious issues with some of your other points. For one thing, point number one is something that you don't back up with evidence, and I believe that it is impossible to produce hard evidence for it, since that would require detailed market research well beyond what any of us are capable of. Furthermore, I have seen plenty of examples of D&D characters from various editions possessing legacies, heirlooms, and inheritance, so I am not convinced that the game design is preventing people from doing this kind of character creation.As for points four and five, I think your essay is severely weakened by the fact that you are only talking in general terms, and you don't seem to have an concrete solutions to the problem you are speaking of. While you deride multiple editions of D&D for a lack of support for these things, you don't offer any examples of what they could have done to support these things system-wise. Generally speaking, I tend to agree with Ed_Laprade that this is more a DMing/group issue than a game system one.Anyways, the main reason I decided to post is actually in response to point number two: the role of heirlooms, legacies, and inheritance in literature; I actually think that you are grossly overstating the role of such things in most stories. To illustrate my point, I will start by pointing out a factual error on your part: Excalibur is not an heirloom. In fact, Uther Pendragon never once touched Excalibur nor the Sword in the Stone. The only relevance that Uther Pendragon has on Arthur's life is that Arthur is the rightful king because he is Uther's son. As soon as Uther dies and the story centers on Arthur, Uther's influence over the legend disappears.It is worth pointing out that characters in works of fiction, including D&D characters, are not real people. Unlike real people, who are strongly influenced by their families and backgrounds, fictional characters are typically created first based on a character concept, while details such as what their childhood was like are created later as justifications for why they turned out  the way their creator wanted them to. Most details such as heirlooms and inheritance are only added in if they are pertinent for overall story. For example, Frodo only inherited the One Ring because the story itself revolved around the Ring. In most literature that I have read, character background details that are not pertinent to the story are typically not mentioned at all. For example, Tolkien never mentions how much money Frodo inherits from his dead parents. As such, if there is nothing about a character's background that is pertinent to a story, then nothing about their background is ever mentioned. There are actually several prominent character archetypes that really do more or less spring out of someone's head fully formed, such as wandering swordsman and vagabond-type characters. So I don't really think that inheritance, legacies, and heirlooms are really necessary for every character, or are a necessary component of literature.</blockquote>

Verification