You've Created A Bad Character. How, why and whose fault is it?

[KYRON45]

I answered that.

Well done.

 

[Deset Gled]

Why does it matter who is to blame? Who is "responsible"?

To me, this just seems like purposefully looking for ways for one player to feel superiority over another for an issue within the game. "I didn't cause the problems! It was X's fault! Blame them!"

I interpreted the question "Who is responsible?" to be more about "root cause analysis" rather than blame.

 

[Wofano Wotanto]

On the flipside, you can also create a good (or even too good) character by accident. An example of this is the 3.5 Druid. Player says "oh wow, I can turn into an animal? Neat!". Hits level 6, looks around for good feats, see this Druid-only one called Natural Spell and suddenly not only is there almost no need to ever not be in Wild Shape, they can use short duration buffs and the like without wasting uses of the ability.

You should give 13th Age a try sometime. One of the kajillion druid types* you can build there does all of that without even needing a feat - but your at-will animal forms don't break the game so there's no power imbalance issue if you want spend all your time as a wolf or something. Spent a year playing one of those without ever being in humanoid form unless I desperately needed thumbs for something.

Which might be another source of "bad character" trouble. A concept that works fine in one system may look like you can duplicate it in another and then turn out unfun/too strong/too weak in practice. That's not really either system's fault, but it's an easy trap to fall into if you're not super-familiar with the one you're trying to port the concept into.

*13A druids were designed to give access to as many possible D&D-trope builds as possible, which resulted in them being about as complex as it gets during character generation even if they were simple enough at the table (since you only use 2-3 middling-broad sets of tricks in any one character). Even the designers admitted they went a little too far, but it is kind of funny that you can easily do a five or six player party of nothing but druids and have minimal overlap in what they each actually does.

 

[R_J_K75]

3. Player unfamiliarity: This is probably the most common result. The player just doesn't know what works and what is good and picks stuff because it sounds like the thing they want to do.

First off making a bad character that doesn't quite work as expected happens from time to time for many reasons and if I'm DMing and a player says they want to make a new character I don't have a problem with it. Though I have always been a firm believer that RPGs require at least a minimum effort on the players part to read and learn the rules for making and playing a character in whatever system they are playing. The onus shouldn't be 100% on the DM to teach players the game. Of course, I will sit down with new players and guide them through the character creation process and give suggestions, but I'm not going to make decisions for them. A player that makes zero effort to learn the game and how to effectively run their character then that's not someone I want at my table.

With all of these, the GM has to bear some of the responsibility because they’re failed to help their players create a successful PC in the game they are running.

If I'm running a campaign in a specific environment say a seafaring one, or an underdark one, or a planar game etc. where certain skills may be useful, I'll let the players know. Although I will never tell them that there are not going to be traps, or any other specific hazard for that matter, I'll present them with a situation and it's up to them to decide how to resolve it.

 

[payn]

I am interested in hearing what other people think. How do you define a "bad character" from a mechanical perspective? What are the potential causes? Who do you think is responsible for making sure a character isn't "bad"? And what are some ways to mitigate the "bad character" if that is really what the player wants to play?

I'd define a bad character as one that is ineffective to the point of detriment to the character and/or group. This usually leads to less fun for the player and/or group. Some causes are poor design (something im seeing less and less of), lack of system knowledge, and oversight or lack of leadership from the GM. The responsibility is spread out between designer, player, and GM. I think chargen should be a shared exercise amongst the players and GM. Some games allow for independently made characters with low to no impact, but others require a lot of synergy. Making characters and thus a group should be a discussion typically done during session zero.

 

[Wofano Wotanto]

I think chargen should be a shared exercise amongst the players and GM. Some games allow for independently made characters with low to no impact, but others require a lot of synergy. Making characters and thus a group should be a discussion typically done during session zero.

Agreed. Surprising how often folks don't do this, really.

 

[Reynard]

Agreed. Surprising how often folks don't do this, really.

In my experience, people usually just want to get to playing. Almost every time I start a new campaign or am going to run something, players end up creating characters beforehand even if I explicitly state I want to do it at Session Zero. it is maddening.

 

[Wofano Wotanto]

In my experience, people usually just want to get to playing. Almost every time I start a new campaign or am going to run something, players end up creating characters beforehand even if I explicitly state I want to do it at Session Zero. it is maddening.

I guess I get the desire not to spend actual session time on character gen (as opposed to some ground rules, veils and lines, etc.) but even doing that part "off the clock" I always try to trade emails to collaborate a bit with the rest of the table. Building a character wholly in a vacuum feels really limiting these days, even it was very much the norm when the hobby and I were both young.

 

[payn]

In my experience, people usually just want to get to playing. Almost every time I start a new campaign or am going to run something, players end up creating characters beforehand even if I explicitly state I want to do it at Session Zero. it is maddening.

I get it, I also love pouring over the options and making a character in my free time. Though, I do think a come together and chat it out is necessary. With Discord these days, its become a lot better since folks can both make a PC in their free time, but also drop a line or two to see whats shaping up.

 

[Reynard]

I guess I get the desire not to spend actual session time on character gen (as opposed to some ground rules, veils and lines, etc.) but even doing that part "off the clock" I always try to trade emails to collaborate a bit with the rest of the table. Building a character wholly in a vacuum feels really limiting these days, even it was very much the norm when the hobby and I were both young.

What I really want is the players to work together to create A GROUP, rather than a collection of PCs. It only happens rarely.