Looking for inspiration for rule-less character creation

[matthijs]

Just to display the difference between gaming cultures, I can't parse that sentence. I would have no idea what you mean by "impure" in that context, nor what "pure" would mean in a contrapositive case. No idea at all.

Sorry, I guess I posted without thinking about whether it'd be understandable for others. My apologies for that.

What I meant was: The idea of doing so much on the fly - in essence starting play before character generation is finished, thus integrating the two into a whole - is a bit frightening when you're used to doing chargen first, then preparation, then starting the game. However, the idea is still good.

[Sydney Freedberg]

Having been mulling this myself in a mirror-opposite context (point-based chargen, where it's equally easy to get lost in the details as it is in freeform narrative chargen), I've come up with what I think are three essential questions to guide character creation:

1. What does your character do that's cool?
This can be anything from supernatural powers to martial arts skills to being an ordinary guy who sticks by his friends no matter what (e.g. Xander from Buffy); obviously it needs to be compatible with the other characters, setting, GM ideas for a story, etc. But the bottom line is, if your character can't do something cool, he/she will be boring to play.

2. What does your character do that gets him/her into trouble?
Anything from bad habits (getting drunk, getting into fights, stealing) to noble virtues (protecting the innocent, righting wrongs). Again, if your character never gets into trouble, boring.

3. Where does your character come from?
Can be as simple as "farm boy from a backwater planet who never knew his father" (hello, Luke) to a Heroquest style narrative rooted in a specific culture. Just so the character didn't pop out of nowhere -- having roots of some kind means having plot hooks, and gives some sense of what a character could logically be expected to know (how to farm, fish, survive in the desert) based on background, allowing you to flesh out the holes in the character conception as needed.

Or, in brief: Where are you from (#3)? Where are you going (#2)? How will you get there (#1)?

[M. J. Young]

Multiverser and Legends of Alyria come to mind as examples of different approaches to the same core concept. The core concept is that character creation works thus: imagine the character you want to play, and then define him in game terms.

Multiverser

In character generation, the only limit to what a character can be is that the player and referee have to agree. Most people play themselves, which is what the game recommends; but there is plenty of room for the "not I" character, and character creation of such a character follows the same model: write down what it is that the character can do.

The book rules focus on getting as complete a character as you can; but the support materials we distribute have moved toward what we've called "On the Fly Character Generation". In this approach, it's assumed that the character can do far too many things to put on paper before play begins, and instead we should focus on those things the character does particularly well, and add the others when and if they're needed during play. Thus the first step is to look at the attributes and decide whether your character has remarkable levels of ability in any of these--top two percent of human ability. If so, we'll mark it down. If not, we'll figure that you might be above average or below average or near average, but whatever it is we'll worry about it if we need it.

After that, the question turns to "skills". No one can list all his skills. We can add skills later. Right now we will note

[*]Skills at which the character is very good, professional level or better;[*]Skills which themselves represent high facility in an area, such as cutting edge technology or training in acrobatics or martial arts;[*]Skills that are highly unusual, such as magic or psionics.[/list:u]A good part of the thinking is that if you've been asked already to identify such skills, you're not going to turn around later and claim to be an expert in Kali or to have taken post graduate courses in genetic engineering or anything like that. If after a few game sessions, you say, "Well, yes, I can swim; I took a lot of YMCA classes for that", that's fine, we'll add swimming to your sheet.

So the short form is:

[*]Imagine what your character should be like;[*]Focus on his outstanding points;[*]Define those in game system terms.[/list:u]
Legends of Alyria

This time the general concept of who the character is comes from group consensus on a story map. Players will create the basic concept of the story, and then identify the characters who will be needed to bring this story to life. Gradually the characters will be fleshed out and parceled out, so that you make one of those characters your own. Again, the core concept is to figure out who this character is and define him in game system terms. In this case, there are some practical limitations on scores, such that one strong attribute prevents the other two from being as strong.

Character generation includes defining certain traits which are akin to character values in many ways. These can be used for and against the character in play.

I hope this helps.

--M. J. Young

[matthijs]

1. What does your character do that's cool?

Now this is very good. I've been trying stuff like "What's the character's primary strength? Defining traits? How will you ensure the interest of other players?", but this question sums it all up easily. (I'm thinking I should find a way to make it sound less informal... but then, why?)

2. What does your character do that gets him/her into trouble?

Definitely has to be there. The best trouble is that which players define themselves. Players that "don't want to get into trouble" won't work in this kind of game.

3. Where does your character come from?

This will add a lot of color, and provide a convenient framework for further character development. It functions on another level than the two "narrative-guiding" questions above.

[matthijs]

The core concept is that character creation works thus: imagine the character you want to play, and then define him in game terms.

I've tried this approach, and some players are kind of stumped by it. Like when you give school kids a blank piece of paper and tell them to draw or write whatever they want: Some start right away, while a few will get really frustrated because they can't get started without some kind of instruction.

In this approach, it's assumed that the character can do far too many things to put on paper before play begins, and instead we should focus on those things the character does particularly well, and add the others when and if they're needed during play.

This I like; it makes for quicker and more focused character generation, and also provides a tool for "instant development" and fleshing out in the game.

Legends of Alyria

...sounds very interesting all in all; I'll have to check out the game. What is meant by a "story map"? How do players know how the characters should/can bring the story to life?

[Peter Hollinghurst]

Nice to see someone else appreciates Kieth Johnstone's book 'impro'.

Just how to integrate it into an approach for building and developing characters in rpgs is at first sight quite hard. The key factor is that under his approach to impro (which works, I discovered his book while studying drama and he has a lot of very deep insights into the nature of roles and characters) his central assumption is that characters build themselves. That is that they have an essential 'identity' of their own seperate from the actor/player which anyone can tap into. In effect they are archetypes (in the true jungian sense, not the rather lame way it is often used to suggest concepts such as character classes in some rpgs). The trick is to find ways that players can 'tap into' these pre-existing characters-in Impro Keith uses masks, which can be startlingly effective, but are probably not much help in an rpg game (and many people find the whole approach of trance mask work rather scary).

My suggestion would be to focus on mannerisms instead. This ties in with a lot of physical drama theory-that if we let our body express a character then everything else will follow-in effect the whole body becomes a mask. (for anyone reading this who has NOT read Impro, this will probably not be making much sense-sorry about that). Elsewhere in these forums I suggested that observing people in a busy setting like a mall or a club can help build a stock series of mannerisms and imaginary stories about people that could form a resource for character creation later, and it would be pretty essential to make the physical drama approach work.

Watch people-make up stories about them (fun, sad, dramatic, hilarious, etc) and keep some notes later of how they stand, how they use their hands, how they use their gaze and so on. These can form the basis of a physical/emotional 'map' for a character. Try replicating some of the mannerisms, holding their story briefly to mind perhaps (ok-so thats introducing a bit of method acting, but it helps). You should find that many players start to get deeper into character once they do this. Some may be too inhibited, as Keith suggests it is rather common a problem, so you might find some of the drama games he mentions handy. Then again-maybe thats all too much work for some people?

Anyway-it does work-its a method I use as a GM and have done for years with great success, and those players who have used it seem to find it can work too. The biggest problem is getting people to try.

Rather than just being a method of playing a character, you will probably find it actually helps to create caharcters too-forget skills, abilities and so on-it throws the 'stats' approach right out of the window. Instead you will find that it builds personalities, issues, relationships and stories.
For example, physical 'maps' that close off the body to the outside world (looking down/averting your gaze, holding hands close into the body, usually clasped, hunching shoulders and so on) will create shy, fearfull characters very rapidly. Put two such characters together and you might find they share secrets-but one with a ohysically aggressive map (intruding into personal space, staring at people, glaring, making fists and so on) and you have a power relationship centering around bullying. Similar effects can be had using voice pitch/volume and accents (though many people have a lot of trouble with this).

As a method of creating characters its biggest drawback is always going to be the timidity/disbelief factor-people are afraid to try, fearing it will reveal their own inability to do it, or their inner own feelings rather than a characters. Others just dont see how it can work. If these can be overcome it does provide an effective and dynamic technique for creating and playing characters that doesnt involve any sort of 'hard rule' or random generation/stats based approach. Just build the character from an emtional level first and let them tell their own stories from there.

I hope this has been of some use to you re Keith's book and characters in rpgs.

[matthijs]

Peter,

I'm not sure how to work these things into a tabletop RPG. I'm going to dodge the whole issue of whether or not most players are willing to actually get up from their chairs and do physical portrayals. It might be possible, but right now I'm not in a situation where I can actually try it out. So aside from that:

Starting with emotion sounds like a really good idea. Instead of trying to build relationships and traits that will generate some kind of emotional resonance between player and character, you can go for the main point right away. "How do you feel about... character X?" "I hate him!" "And about... NPC Y?" "I distrust her, but am very curious about her." Then, later, you can add reasons: "Why do you hate X?" "He killed my father!" "What's up with you and Y?" "I saw her steal something from the store the other day, and she looked straight at me and walked out."

Mannerisms can also work. I'm a bit skeptical, though, because people can easily overact, leading to behaviour that's annoying to others, and that they themselves aren't able to keep up for long.

[Peter Hollinghurst]

I agree that its hard to do full body activities in a table top game-I rarely do when GM'ing myself-though on occassion I have done such things as reach over to touch a player (in fact, white wolfs Giovanni Chronicles I uses this as an active techinque to create dislike of an NPC-they encourage the storyteller to keep pawing at people and getting too close-even licking one players hand). This is rare in how I employ the technique-mostly its a sit down affair from start to finish. Otherwise it tends to lapse into performance/drama more than rpg...
Most of your body language can be used sitting down anyway-head movement and hand movement being two of the biggest factors in non verbal communication, and just how you look at people (or not) being very powerfull.
If you want to look at two different (both both highly valid imo) drama techniques I would suggest checking out Meyerhold (biomechanics) vs Stanislavsky-the physical as starting point vs the emotional as starting point.
As I said earlier-the biggest stumbling block is that its hard to get people involved. Over dramatatic use is not really a big problem-its often a step towards toning it down later, but yes subtle use is more effective in the long run. I don't think that 'as is' there is a workable approach overall for non actors here-it would require more thought and experimentation I would think. I suggested it because (when used) it works, and because it does demonstrate the possible beginnings of a technique of character creation and play that is systemless and draws on Keith's impro work.
In practice for every person who tries the approach out, a dozen are either afraid or feel its too much acting and not enough like playing an rpg, so how much practical use one can get from it Im not sure. To do it well you also need to draw on levels of experience and practice I suspect most gamers are simply not interested in developing.

[Moah]

You could make the whole first session into a story about discovering who everyone is. Not only each characters discovering who the other characters are, but also each player discovering who his character really is. Put them players, with no characters (or more exactly "blank" characters ie, noone knows nothing about them) into a situation where they must socialize, and something happens, like someone dies, or a big red head locks the castle and says something threatening, or whatever your references are.
As they mix and match between them and with the NPCs, the characters will have to answer questions and therefore define themselves a little more. As each situation will require skills or techniques to solve, we'll discover that so and so is actually a rocket scientist. Or a king with a passion for locksmithing.

Make sure the situation you create will require strengths and skills later needed in your overall story, though.

Should be fun ;)

[M. J. Young]

Perhaps the best way to get a handle on what is a Storymap in Alyria is to see how one is put together. I think that the thread http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=5994">Young Playtest Group First Storymap probably will give you a pretty solid idea of how we did it. I'm told that they're not terribly different from Sorcerer's relationship maps, of which I have read much but not yet had experience, but an essential difference (to my mind) is that with Alyria there is a single map for all the player characters, while my recollection of Sorcerer is that each character has his own map.

--M. J. Young

[simon_hibbs]

HeroWQuest offers a variation on the question/answer technique in the Clan Generation system, orriginaly from the computer game King of Dragon Pass. Assuming you'e going to play a clan based game, the GM takes the players through a history quiz defining the mythology of the clan, for example -

"During the civil war did your clan: A) Side with the previous king; B) Support the challenging prince; C) Remain neutral."

The answers to all these questions influence the current status, beliefs and customs of the clan.


Simon Hibbs

[matthijs]

Simon,

that sounds like it could be integrated into a history-heavy game. Having a series of key historical events and asking how the character related to them as they occurred. This would also be a good way to teach the players about the background without having to give them "homework" to do - they would experience it more or less in character.

Wow, this thread is full of great ideas!

[Sydney Freedberg]

...Having a series of key historical events and asking how the character related to them as they occurred. This would also be a good way to teach the players about the background without having to give them "homework" to do - they would experience it more or less in character.

I actually did this for a game I ran years ago, in which the player characters were all members of the ruling house of a science fantasy empire. In the initial session devoted to making characters, everyone got a set amount of points to spend on their stats each year (yes, I know you were asking about "rules-less" chargen); I'd describe the major events of that year; and the characters who were old enough got to participate in making the history (accompanying their uncle the Grand Constable on a punitive expedition, battling a warp-demon, whatever) -- usually just by describing their actions, but we actually acted out at least one scene from each character's formative years.

The only downside of this method was it worked too well at putting them into the setting: Because the characters had all "grown up" during a period of civil war, all the players became obsessed with maintaining the stability of the Empire and didn't backstab each other nearly as much as I'd have liked.

[komradebob]

Sydney:
I find it funny that you consider that a "downside". Actually, what you describe as the characters' ( and players') attachment to preserving stability within the Empire follows remarkably closely some examples of social/political movements in real-world history.
Robert

[Sydney Freedberg]

Sydney: I find it funny that you consider that a "downside". ....

Oh, it was very natural: A generation that grows up in a period of instability will naturally overcompensate towards stability. But to the extent I was originally trying for a Machiavellian, palace-coup-ridden game, I defeated myself. Instead of giving them a "childhood" experience of civil war, I should've given them a period of crushing, repressive stability.

To extract a general Lesson Learned and get back on topic before the Dar Lord Edwards smites us with his Fell Weapon, the Thread Splitter:

If you immerse player-characters in your setting, they may show their appreciation by reacting against it. So you may have to introduce them to your setting by showing them the opposite of what you want them to end up doing: a period of repressive peace if you want them to start a civil war, a period of social collapse if you want them to build a new order, a period of unchecked monster-invasions if you want them to go monster-hunting. (This is especially pertinent if player-characters are powerful enough to change history.) You can't just expect to show them examples of other people doing X and expect them to do X themselves -- they might do instead whatever it takes to prevent X.