Player-created Descriptors and those from the book

[Old_Scratch]

Ron wrote:

And if so, revise the lists, don't just add things as made-up snap-on descriptors.

I've seen this said a couple of times, and I may have overlooked earlier posts about this, but I'd like to hear a little more about why this is suggested so often by Ron.

I routinely suggest the opposite to my players, look at the book, but go ahead and make up your own. It seems to me that the Descriptors are a great way for players to flesh out their characters and explain the character's nature. Yet I find the Descriptors in the book to be somewhat unexciting and generic, and I often use them as a stepping off point.

Ron, why the suggestion that players adhere to a set of descriptors?

Can veering from these suggested guidelines enhance play, or detract from it?

I'm not just looking for a "yes" or "no" canonical answer, but I'm hoping to hear a little exploring of the topic: how descriptors can neatly tie the themes or premise of a game together and alternatives towards loosening up the descriptors to player creativity (or reasons not to do so).

--==--
Garett

[jburneko]

Hey There,

I'm not Ron but here's my answer.  It has to do with getting everyone on the same page regarding what the game is all about.  The descriptor list is the next thing after the Humanity definition for focusing character concepts to fit the current customization.

This is my current descriptor list for my Gothic S&S setting:

Stamina

Scoundrel-trained
Trained soldier
Big and vigorous
Just healthy
Arcane Regimen
Unnatural means

Will

Aristocrat
Zest for life
Angry
Vow
Religion (Catholicism, Protestantism)
Belief System (Agnosticism or Atheist)
Lover

Lore

Changeling (Lore 2+)
Half-breed (Lore 2+)
Family (Lore 3+)
Bloodline/Birthright, Adept (Lore 4+)
Bloodline/Birthright, Apprentice (Lore 2+)
Adept (Lore 5+)
Apprentice (Lore 2+)
Religion (Paganism)
Naive (Lore 1-2)

Notice that SOME of these come from S&S but I've left a few out and added my own to bring it more in line with the Gothic source material.  I've deliberately left out Savage-Raised, Brush with the Unknown, Leader of Men.  I've added back in Belief System but am HIGHLY specific about what kinds of belief systems are appropriate.  And I've added all kinds of Lore descriptors that fit in with the "legacy" issues that the Gothic often focused on.

Jesse

[Old_Scratch]

I'm not Ron but here's my answer.  It has to do with getting everyone on the same page regarding what the game is all about.  The descriptor list is the next thing after the Humanity definition for focusing character concepts to fit the current customization.

Feel free to weigh in on the discussion! I wanted Ron's design decision, but I also want to see its application in the other peoples' play.

So how many things have to used to make sure that everyone is on the same page? The GM discusses the concepts with the players, describes the world, sets the parameters for what humanity, demons, lore, and sorcerers are, and thus, how important are the descriptors in setting the scene? Is all that stuff sufficient to set a scene?

I liked the list, but if a player wanted to create their own descriptors, would you allow them? Does the general concept embodied by each and then expanded upon by players sufficient for evoking a theme?

Sta: 1 Tired to the Bone
Will: 2 Burdened by Regrets
Lore: 7 Steeped in the darkest of secrets, Fatefully Bound up in Rituals

[jburneko]

The way I see it.  There are four questions that "define" a Sorcerer game.

1) What is Humanity?
2) What is a Demon?
3) What is a Sorcerer?
4) What do Rituals consist of?

I think the last two are woefully overlooked by most Sorcerer players.  In another thread, Ron, mentioned nailing down "Look and Feel" before worrying about Humanity definitions and I think 2-4 do that pretty well and yet 3 and 4 often get ignored at this stage.

When I first thought up the Gothic S&S setting what I saw was lich kings refusing to let go of their crowns.  A warrior vowing to avenge his fallen brother on a lightning struck battlefield.  A hand holding a pulsing bleeding gemstone.

I think the Descriptor list is more or less how one answers "What is a Sorcerer?" for that given setting.  If you look in S&S there's a small section where there's different "types" of Sorcerers expressed in terms of descriptor combinations.  These are mapped onto specific figures from the source material.

Now, do you never let a player make up a descriptor themselves?  Well, no, I don't think so but I think new descriptors should be harshly judged as to their appropriateness.  I think the problem with some of the examples you've listed is that they're too colorful and specific.  Descriptors are supposed to describe "sources" for each of the scores where your made up descriptors verge on behavioral descriptions or elements of backstory.  Descriptors "anchor" a character's behavior they don't "steer" it.  If that makes any sense.

Jesse

[Judd]

I have run games where the players see the list of descriptors and suggest one that they think was logical for the setting but missing.  I have found that descriptors not only flesh out PC's but they tie the PC's to the setting and to each other.

When you allow everyone to make up their own they tend to go all over the place and it leads to a game with less cohesion.

I did this for my first Sorcerer game and wound up with a Samurai walkin the Red Wastes of Mu.  It was cool but it just didn't quite fit, ya know?

The whole game was a bit off, not only from the samurai but for other reasons linking back to the individualized descriptors.

[Ron Edwards]

Everyone speaks wisdom.

Read Jesse's post twice.

Best,
Ron