character creation system

[Butch]

First thing first: hello everybody!

It's my first post and I want to apologize to every body if my english is not so good.

Ok, here we go with the real stuff:

Do you think that a rpg can be "playable" with a complete "liberty" character creation system.

What I mean by that it's that the player can do whatever character he wants. There's no character point, no dice throwing, etc. You simply put what you want where you want. In another way: you simply do the character you want to play. That's it, that's all!!

I always dream to master a game where you have this big old guy, the great sword master, that protect that silly little girl whose append to always read his mind!

Yes, all the characters won't be equal but you have the freedom!!

Is it possible?! Is it playable?!!

What do you think?!

Butch

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Butch,

Welcome to the Forge. I apologize for not answering you at length but I'll come back to this thread soon.

Check out:
The Window
The Pool
Universalis (when it becomes available soon)

The first two should be easy to find at the Resource Library. Also see the Random Order Creations forum for more information about The Pool.

These are three very, very different games. They all have the features you are describing, but their mechanics and philosophy of play are extremely different. You might be surprised at how many shapes "freedom" can take.

Best,
Ron

[Eric J.]

No. People like you might not need guidlines. Others do.

[Mike Holmes]

There's really two issues here. First by "complete freedom" do you mean just freedom to create any character you like within the parameters of a mechanical system? Or do you mean freedom to create a character without mechanical reference at all?

In the first case, you can use a lot of systems that are point based, just ignore the point limits, and probably be able to get something close to the character you are looking for. But that's not quite complete freedom, I suppose. The systems Ron mentioned allow even greater lattitude in defining abilities and, as such, should allow you to get exactly the character you are looking for. Still, adherence to any system could be seen as a limitation on freedom.

To divorce character completely from mechanics sounds like you are starting to get into the realm of collaborative storytelling, or interactive fiction, or just plain fiction. One can always go with one of these activities if one wants freedom from mechanics.

I suppose that a system could be devised (and probably has been) that mechanically covered all aspects of world and/or plot movement except for characters, which would allow for "complete freedom" of character generation, while still maintaining a semblance of a "game" structure. But I'm not sure of the point of such an experiment, as, if you have any mechanics, why not have some for characters as well? And. FWIW,  I think that it would almost certainly end up with a collaborative storytelling label (as one of he designers of the aforementioned Universalis, I can tell you that even that game which does have mechanics relating to characters makes people want to call it that). Not that I discurage such an activity, just that you should be aware of the definitions that are (usually) attached to such activities.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Heh, now that I think of it (and yes, I'm tooting my own horn), Universalis has so much freedom that you don't even have to make a character at all if you don't feel like it. One of my favorite ways to play, actually.

Mike

[Butch]

Thanks for the replies!

I will check The Window and The Pool.

What I mean by "freedom" is freedom "within" the system.  The way I see it goes a little bit like that: each player describe his character the way he sees it: My character is an old sword master. He still has great strength but he loose a little bit of his dexterity, bla bla bla.  After the description is over, the player now put value in each "fields" of the character sheet: great strength = STRENGHT of 17 (if value goes between 1 and 20), loose dexterity = DEXTERITY of 12, great sword master = SWORD skill at 18, etc.

And you have this little silly girl with a blowing mind: she surely doesn't have a good strength (she's just a little girl): STRENGTH = 6, but a blowing mind!! humm... READ MIND = 17.

Hope it's help make it "clearer"!

Butch

[Bailywolf]

Get hold of  Bankuei and demand a playtest copy of his Persona system... and if you like mystical kung-fu, see if he has his Forgotten Fist setting worked up.  It captures pretty much exactly what you seem to be asking for.

[Andrew Martin]

Butch wrote:
> What I mean by "freedom" is freedom "within" the system.  The way I see it goes a little bit like that: each player describe his character the way he sees it: My character is an old sword master. He still has great strength but he loose a little bit of his dexterity, bla bla bla.

> And you have this little silly girl with a blowing mind: she surely doesn't have a good strength (she's just a little girl): ... but a blowing mind!!

Why not convert the description into game mechanics on the fly? In most situations, your characters will automatically succeed. For example, the sword master can easily defeat any one in combat, unles they're his equal. The little girl can read anyone's mind, unless their mind is shielded in some way or don't have a mind.

When in a situation where things are not so clear cut, work out the odds. For example, the little girl is in a tug-of-war with another child over a favourite toy. Both children have childlike strength, so it's roughly fifty-fifty, so each player rolls D6. The player who rolls the highest, their character gets the toy. If both dice are equal, there's a tie; both children are struggling to get it and not succeeding. If one dice is maximum and the other minimum, one child falls over, perhaps getting bruised and scratched; and the other child gets the toy.

Let's try some more. If the little girl tries to read the mind of a foe, who's protected by an amulet of mind shield, the little girl fails. If the amulet didn't do this, it would obviously be a fake... So the little girl needs to work with the old sword master, in taking away the amulet from the foe. Perhaps the swords master challenges the foe to a duel, then cuts the cord of the amulet, while pretending to miss...

What do you think?

[Butch]

That's exactly want I want to do: convert the description into game mechanics on the fly!!

The only "difficulty" I see is the fact that the party will be a bunch of characters where no one will be of the same "strength" (in term of "game mechanics").

Can you see any problem playing that type of game (except maybe the fact that there will always have some powermonger!)

Butch

[Ferry Bazelmans]

Can you see any problem playing that type of game (except maybe the fact that there will always have some powermonger!)
Butch

Any game is susceptible to abuse. I think this is a common misconception about the quality of a roleplaying game.

I.e. if it can easily be abused, it's a bad game

Which is of course bullshit. A game can always be abused, wether it has rules that allow for a lot of freedom on the player's part or not.
Which is why freeform roleplaying games over the web have a tendency to go wrong, but a game like Shadowrun also sprouts its share of powermongering munchkins.

A simple rule is: if you're playing it with people who abuse the game, don't play it with these people.

A mechanic like you propose would be fine, it just needs a more mature player.

Fer (Crayne)

[Mike Holmes]

A mechanic like you propose would be fine, it just needs a more mature player.

More "politically correct" would be to say that it requires a player who's goals would not cause him to want to abuse the mechanic. There is a certain type of player that prefers their games to support what we call Gamist play. This is a valid desire, but these players will not like the idea of unbalanced characters, usually, as they see it as an unfair playing field (note certain of these players might just see playing a weaker character as a handicap). The game you are writing would just not be for them. There are other players, however, that would enjoy the idea.

Anyhow, at the risk of repeating myself, there are lots of games that do this already in a bewildering array of ways. I play GURPS, for example, with my players without using the point system. They like being able to design their character just like they envision them (and nobody misses the extra math calculating costs, either). And nobody cares that one player's character is more powerful in some way than another.

Certain editions of Ars Magica suggest having some players play Wizards while other players play non-Wizards who are, in that game, a quantum leap less powerful. They point out how in literature how rarely are the main characters balanced in power, and try to establish a situation where that is emulated. Some people prefer playing supporting roles, believe it or not.

And nobody playing Universalis ever cared about balancing character power (except maybe to create a dramatic conflict).

Lots of games are "unbalanced" with respect to power levels, and there are lots of players who do not care. Do a search for threads here that deal with concepts like "play balance", "power balance", "screen time", etc. They may help you decide what sort of balance, if any, that you may need.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

That's exactly want I want to do: convert the description into game mechanics on the fly!!

For what purpose? If you are going to come up with the description before play, then why not figure out the statistics before play to make play faster and easier? What advantage does converting on the fly give you?

Mike

[Bankuei]

Other games to check out: Hero Wars, Over the Edge.  

Persona has no inherent scores to it, theres just a general idea of 3 levels relative to the active character: Weaker, on par, and Stronger.  If you know about how badass anyone is at something, you know which of the 3 categories to use.  Obviously the swordmaster is good at fighting, most other folks are weaker to him, other swordmasters are on par, and his own master is stronger than him.  This modifies the roll.  You don't even have to rate each stat on the fly, just have a general idea about the character based on the description.  Totally scalable.

Chris

[Mike Holmes]

Other games to check out: Hero Wars, Over the Edge.  

Persona has no inherent scores to it,

Persona, definitely. Over the Edge is balanced in number of abilities, which is not "power balanced", but is "play balanced" a little. HW, OTOH, is actually fairly power balanced as it happens.

Mike

[Matt Gwinn]

I can't believe no one has mentioned Wyrd.
Wyrd is a great system for creating just what you want, especially and old grizzled swordsman.  Though the background is a little limiting in regards to other genres I still contend that the system can be easily converted to any era, so long as the System's Premise remains intact.

I don't think balance is really an issue here.  If I could design my character EXACTLY the way I want him, I could care less if someone else has  a more powerful character.  I can see hardcore Gamists having a problem, but most gamists will try to make their character as powerful as possible anyway.  

I do see Gamists being unsatisfied with such a game, because they have nothing to strive for.  A gamist wants to be rewarded and if his character is already his ideal what's the point?

Just some thoughts.

,Matt