{pardon if this double post}
This thread prompted this in conjunction to something our group was exploring:
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=18369.0

Linked below is a pdf to my RPGnet thread on art.  The pdf is a "cover sheet" to help prompt questions much like Burning Wheel's BITs does.  Since we are grafting onto Champions, BITs is not a direct correlation that is comfortable for a couple of the players intact.  The first link *should* take you to the PDF hopefully.  The 2nd link is to the page that the pdf is on in the RPGnet thread.  I need to link to RPGnet since I could attach directly here.  Much of the below text is pasted from there.

The reboot concerns RDU Neil's Champions campaign. Lately, there has been a lot of dimensional adventures. Cribbing off of Marvel's Exiles and Stargate (Atlantis) and a bit of discussion of round-robin GMing... we are going to do an alternate RDU to jump our PCs from. Then they will travel to different dimensions encounter different stories. Making it easy to for co-GMs to step in and not step on toes of the others.

So tonight, we are sitting down and creating characters together, sorta tweaked analogues of our usual campaign. Wanna play a heroic, good version of Doctor Destroyer? Why not. Wanna play a tweaked version of another Player Character? Lets talk about it and see where the boundries might exist.

Our group is very different personalities. We have trouble sometimes communicating what we want for our PCs... what kind of scenes... what kind of subplots. I personally provide a lot of "hooks" for my GMs. But Neil sometimes interperts those hooks (re: Hero Disadvantages) in very different ways. We've talked about how to facilitate communication. This is just one arrow in the quiver, but since I'm a visual dude, Neil came up with this.

What Neil is going to say tonight is "Do NOT put anything down on the sheet that the PLAYER does NOT want to explore." In other words, while it may be cool that Bounty the Cosmic Head Hunter has a vicious hunted herself... if the player is NOT interested in being pursued relentlessly... don't put it down.

Due to other threads I've seen of "my players are not responding" of late, I thought this might be a way to help. It might even help an already running game, if folks are quite gelling their PCs to the situation (or vice versa).

Critique and comments are awesome!

http://forum.rpg.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=13535&d=1137603207
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?p=5164871#post5164871

I like the idea of this sheet. I have a few suggestions, but they might just be a different way of doing it, not a better way:

• I'd like the "Why is this character cool to play" box to be twice the size of the other boxes.
• I think "What is your character's biggest secret" would be an interesting thing to have on there, as it would bring out that element of the character while at the same time making a character secret into public player knowledge, which I think is a very good thing.
• Since it's you doing this, I'd like to see an outline of a character somewhere on the sheet for people to draw their costumes on.

I second the idea that you should make the "Why is the character cool to play?" box bigger. Or maybe rephrase it to, "What is the coolest thing about this character?" and put it at the top of the page, with a bigger box.

Similarly, I'm not so fond of the "What is the character BEST at" and "What is the character good at questions" so much. They seem to be a bit generic and could result in bland answers, IMO. Maybe change them to "What is the most interesting* ability this character has?" Also, you seem to have two similar boxes - "What niche does your character fill on the team?" and "What is your character’s place in the group?" which I think could be combined into "How and why does your character work with the rest of the team?" Finally, I think the "biggest secret" thing is worth adding and you could throw in a "greatest weakness" question too.

Please don't take my comments as ripping your idea to shreds. I think it's pretty cool, and could be a worthwhile addition to many games.

Warren

*"most interesting"="coolest", but I didn't want to repeat myself.

dunlaing wrote:
I like the idea of this sheet. I have a few suggestions, but they might just be a different way of doing it, not a better way:

• I'd like the "Why is this character cool to play" box to be twice the size of the other boxes.
• I think "What is your character's biggest secret" would be an interesting thing to have on there, as it would bring out that element of the character while at the same time making a character secret into public player knowledge, which I think is a very good thing.
• Since it's you doing this, I'd like to see an outline of a character somewhere on the sheet for people to draw their costumes on.

second the idea that you should make the "Why is the character cool to play?" box bigger. Or maybe rephrase it to, "What is the coolest thing about this character?" and put it at the top of the page, with a bigger box.

"What niche does your character fill on the team?" and "What is your character’s place in the group?"

Oh.  Forgot to say a couple of things.

Neil and I are totally in agreement that some entries may be left as "I dunno."  Neil very much likes to craft his characters in play.  I very much come to the table with a strong concept in place.  Neither are wrong. 

and...

We are going to use it tonight.  I'll have an actual "gameplay" (or game chargen) report tomorrow for ya!

We will see how the coversheet works in action.

Here is a link to the Herogames website... where I could post the Character Cover Sheet in full.

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=945003&postcount=1

It is not intended to be THE character sheet... which will have the game stats/powers/skills and picture.  Again... Cover sheet... not the actual sheet.

I'm totally open for modifying things... but I kept the boxes relatively small to discourage long winded description... and encourage concise detail.  The "Best at..." is somewhat important for our style of play (IMO of course) because we are playing in an action/adventure genre... where the character's ability to "do something" is important.  In fact... if player's find that they aren't that interested in what their character can "do" might indicate a disfunction between their desires and the game. 

Now... if the thing they are best at doing... they are happy if it only comes up rarely... that they are more interested in exploring their relationships and weaknesses... cool.  But in most cases, they do want to have that "unique" element to them.  It could be flat and boring... but it could be quite specific to why they are playing the character.  We'll see.  (I agree with Storn that "Best at..." and "Niche..." may well overlap.  I also think asking the question twice, but in two different ways, could help folks really think about what they want out of the character.

As Storn said... we'll see tonight.

Very neat.

My personal take would be to rephrase things explicitly along the lines of "what do you want?," e.g.
- "what are you most excited about doing with this character?"
- "what cool things do you want to see your character get to do in play?"
- "what horrible, awful things do you think it would be cool to have happen to your character?"

Sydney wrote:
Very neat.

My personal take would be to rephrase things explicitly along the lines of "what do you want?," e.g.
- "what are you most excited about doing with this character?"
- "what cool things do you want to see your character get to do in play?"
- "what horrible, awful things do you think it would be cool to have happen to your character?"

Sydney wrote:
Very neat.

My personal take would be to rephrase things explicitly along the lines of "what do you want?," e.g.
- "what are you most excited about doing with this character?"
- "what cool things do you want to see your character get to do in play?"
- "what horrible, awful things do you think it would be cool to have happen to your character?"

Well, like you guys say, they don't have to answer it.  As long as you make that explicit, I think they'll feel safe.

RDU wrote: I'm totally open for modifying things... but I kept the boxes relatively small to discourage long winded description... and encourage concise detail. 

OK, go with "why is the character cool to play" then :) I do still think that this question - in whatever form - is the 'core' of the player's view of the character, and should be promoted to the top of the sheet and made otherwise more important. Plus, I agree with Sydney that asking the questions along "what do you want?" makes things more explicit, and therefore, IMO, better.

Warren wrote:
OK, go with "why is the character cool to play" then :) I do still think that this question - in whatever form - is the 'core' of the player's view of the character, and should be promoted to the top of the sheet and made otherwise more important. Plus, I agree with Sydney that asking the questions along "what do you want?" makes things more explicit, and therefore, IMO, better.

Yup, it in its first form, Neil had put that question at the top.  At my suggestion, he put it at the bottom.  I just had this funny feeling that some players at OUR table would freeze if you hit them with that first.  They need to work up to it.

And for me too... The character that I'm mulling over, I'm not sure why the character would be cool to play, in the beginning.  Neil and I were on the phone, he tossed a concept out there and I countered with an idea I had been thinking of.  But in the early going, I didn't know what made the character cool to me in a nutshell.  After the conversation, I would be in a much better place  to state that. 

I think once I do the sheet tonight, I might be able to summerize it.  Or least be close enough to start the game off with some kick and bang and boom and direction!

Okay, I have an after action report.  I'm sure Neil will chime in with even better observations than me.

We did a group chargen session last night and turn into quite a bit of fun for at least me... I'm pretty sure everyone had fun, but I don't want to speak for them.

The players
Neil:  anyone who reads this thread will know of.  The head GM.  Illusionist Nar as a GM (I think).
Storn:  that's me.  I'm pretty nar..but I can do gamist stuff too.  I'm pretty opinionated and will drive story.
Joe:  A definitely gamist leaning player, very enthusiastic and comes to play.
James:  A nar leaning player, who can be very quiet and hard to draw out.
Brigit:  Joe's wife who constantly surprises me with her love of pounding things combined with extraordinairy (and often funny) sudden roleplaying vignettes. 

The Premise:
Reboot of Neil's RDU Champions (people with powers) game.  Or perhaps a new start instead of reboot is more appropriate.  The idea is to start the game in an "alternate" dimension of RDU.  Where some of the dimensional subplots can be the main focus of this group's story.  We all know that very quickly, our group is going to be jaunting through dimensions.  Our group is to have known of each other and been a group for "awhile".  Neil has to come up with a character too, because round-robin GMing is going to be attempted.

The Evening.
I get there after Joe and Brigit, but before James.  Almost immediately, we start talking about our concepts.  Brigit fills out the Chargen Cover Sheet IMMEDIATELY, cracking me up.  She grades some papers first, and I blink, and she has written the whole thing out.  Here I feared I was the one coming to the table with too much already pre-prepped in my head.  Bam.  She is pretty much ready to go. 

She sets the tone for what the Chargen Cover Sheet's primary usefulness is; "What is your role in the group"... her quick answer is "big sister".  Cool.  Joe, Neil and I all nod.

Joe has two concepts, both are well-rounded jack of all trades.  One is a gadgeteer.    The other is a the 4 elements super martial artist.  Both concepts are probably gearing up for beign the tactical leader of the outfit.  Something I strongly encourage because I've done it and don't want to repeat that experience.  Both ideas intrigue Neil.  I lean towards gadgeteer.

My concept is a young naive alternate daughter of a character I already run.  She comes from a legacy of superheroes...and I could draw powers from Dad, Mom, and Grandpa, skipping Grandma because Grandma was Desolidification power set and the combo with the other genetic powers would be heinous and I've already played desolid characters recently.  Visual dude that I am, I based it on a character that I had drawn to demonstrate "flight powers" for Hero Games... and then drew several more times in subsequent publications... so this was a character who I had been vaguely, but gradually building in my head for some time.

Neil is really vague about what he is thinking concept wise.  But he mentions being the "second", non-com kinda role.

James arrives.  We all quickly bring him up to speed on what we are thinking, trotting out our concepts.  I hold back, wanting to give him space because I'm pretty outgoing and he needs that space to think and then come forth with that. 

We start using the sheets in earnest while table talk continues.  James is interested in a flying brick who has to put up with Secret ID kinda problems, or a hot-headed flame guy named appropriately "hot shot".  As we fill out the sheets, the whole table goes, "well, Secret ID is almost useless if we are jumping from dimension to dimension."  Or is it?  The suggestion is thrown out that perhaps variations of those important relations of his superman clone often seem to come up.  This is intriguing, we all like it... we gently steer James towards his superman clone and away from Hotshot. 

But this has blown my concept out of the water.  I was thinking of my character being a flying brick, naive, exploratory and between James and Brigit, my concept is too similar to an amalgamation of both for me.  But I'm cool with that and want James to have this character because often he takes subtle, overly complicated in mechanics terms, characters... and they are not all that "super".  This is a guy who can stand up to a whole lot of punishment.  I'll come up with something else... what?  I don't know.

{not sure how much I can get in one post, going to continue on in a new post}

Brigit having already filled out the sheet, comes up with "Diamond"  The tough as diamonds brick who is a Hilton in this world.  Being a big sister adn a damage soak is important to her.

Neil comes forward with wanting to be the "dark advisor" (my words now).  The guy who might suggest the dirty way of doing things, the expedient way of doing things.  We all ask a bunch of questions about if this is going to derail the group.  But really, Neil wants us to challenge him when he comes forward with the expedient solution.  He wants that dialogue...and he wants us to know that his most important relationship is the team... that he is closer to super villainy than the rest of us... but doesn't want to caljole or dictate and play power games too much because he respects us.  He is a bit lost on what his Powers are..but is grokking on the role within the group.

Joe settles on the Fire, Wind, Water and Earth martial artist of the 4 Seasons Temple.  Being the leader/diplomat and The Chargen Cover Sheet prompts how much Presence each character should have.. Diamond being the higest presence in her diamond form.

I have nothing for me.  Still fumbling around for a concept.  Someone says we need a Conscience if Neil is going to be the Expediator.  That starts me thinking... a 'Paladin" concept is tossed out... and that sorta grabs me, but I sorta doesnt.  Great suggestions from the table suddenly gives me an Insight.  I like characters literally with Insight.  So much so, I then start to build a mystic who's actual codename will be Insight.  A Powerset of Light.. can see far, can throw mystic lightbeams around, a Healer, has Precog abilities (GM's control only not to derail plotlines).  Cool.  I'm happy.  I start to fill out my sheet.

James speaks of his character being very optimistic after filling a section out.  We all get that, cool.  He will be our "level puller" and launch many a misadventure.  We all like that. 

Neil gets an Insight too... his character will Steal Powers from foes, permnently.  But does it rarely.  This is a cool, dark power... and allows for just an odd assortement of "starting" abilities.  It sparks off conversation of how much should we 'reign' in Neil, how much he wants to be reigned it.  By the way, "Reign" becomes his codename late in the evening.  He works he is noble class, specifics to follow later.

The rest of the evening is spent fine tuning and actually building the characters roughly.  Neil did have a scene to start the game with,but we never get to it because of folks getting tired.  James and Brigit leave... upon goodbyes, I think it is obvious that everyone felt like we had crafted a pretty good cast to jump into whatever the winds of fate were going to blow at us.

James, Neil and I sat around for another hour and 1/2 crafting and talking and analyzing.

In conclusion:  While I talked about what was happening at the table MORE than what was happening on the Chargen Cover Sheet... I feel that it really did help to have it.  It was no silver bullet, but it gave us all a starting place to begin the conversation.  Definitely the role of the individual within the group was hammered out for each of us... that seemed to be an important category for us.

I'm looking forward to playing!

Storn wrote:
But I'm cool with that and want James to have this character because often he takes subtle, overly complicated in mechanics terms, characters... and they are not all that "super".  This is a guy who can stand up to a whole lot of punishment.  I'll come up with something else... what?  I don't know.

The actual use of the Character Cover Sheet was very interesting from my position.  I'd come up with it thinking that not all players would be able to answer every question... but that it would guide our discussions to discovering that final bit of "Why is this character cool to play?"

Brigit:  At one point, in discussing her place in the group and her desire to be the "Big Sister" we saw this as he taking the "informal leader" role in the group... next to Joe's "Tactical/Team Leader" role.  Joe put it his terms... "Yeah... there is the Lieutenant... but then there is the NCO... Brigit gets to be the NCO."  Brigit literally grinned and bounced in her seat at that... clearly one of those "tells" that she is excited to have that position.  She was also the only one at the table who really new what she wanted to be "Best at..."  It came down to soaking damage... taking the hit (also dishing it out, but that was secondary).  I think this gave her confidence in the "survivability" of her character to the point where she could then enjoy thinking about what was really cool about playing... which were the Big Sister/NCO/Trusted member we all look up to role. 

Storn:  We had a great conversation about Insight's ability to "see the truth."  I initially saw him as the evangelist, passionate, "Do the right thing!" kind of guy... but the more and more Storn talked it was that he was the mouthpiece... the conciliator, the mediator, the peace maker.  I'd originally seen this as more of Joe's role... the one who makes the decision and has a sense of "balance" going on.  I still have lingering concerns that there will be competition/conflict in this role between the players... but we talked about it enough that I figure we can work it out in game play.  It did create a very powerful conversation we had after Joe and Brigit left, because my concern with the concept of Insight is that with his power set he will be "always right."  My concern that Storn will be upset if his character's "flashes of insight" lead to conflict (morale and/or physical) or that he misinterprets something that causes a conflict for the characters in the game.  When we talked about it, he was very open about whether he really wants conflict in the game or not.  If his character's insight leads to conflict... will it feel like Storn was "wrong" and "failed" and therefore he didn't get to explore what he wanted.  My problem is... without conflict or failure or being wrong... where is the drama and the story?  I think using this tool and process is really getting us into some very deep areas.

Joe:  Just a clue as to his truly gamist nature.  When building characters, we weren't worrying about points.  Build to concept... we'll look at points later.  Joe's concept was hugely more expensive than anyone at the table.  He was really into the crunchy "how's this going to be done with Hero" bits... but he was also very frustrated that it was so expensive.  He clearly felt like he was "cheating" compared to the rest of us by taking more points... that he had an unfair advantage, thus the challenge wasn't as great for him.

Me (Neil):  My use of the Character Cover Sheet turned out to be similar to what other's had warned about.  I had a very hard time filling out "best at" or "good at" or "niche"... but I immediately grokked on What does the player want to explore?  "Walking the line of misuse of power!"  Important Relationship?  "The team is my conscience."  Struggle to overcome?  "Power corrupts... but nothing is accomplished without power."    Powers and stats are secondary to my desire to have seens where I have to wrestle with using power effectively and not misusing/abusing it. 

James:  Storn pretty much said it all... but I do think that his character's "survivability" is also key to James feeling free to play up the personality and motivations that really intrigue him.  If it doesn't work for him, I think we have an interesting quandry.  For someone who loves comic books and the classic supers genre... what is he really looking forward to in role playing such... because beating up the badguy doesn't seem to create a sense of reward/accomplishment in him... so if not, what does?  To be honest, I've been struggling with this for years as his GM, because having players overcome combat/tactical scenarios is very rewarding for me... and I feel it needs to be fifty percent of the game at times... and this doesn't really move James much.  This character I have the least handle on... because I'll admit, even after many years, I have the least handle on what James wants.  I'm honestly using this campaign as a way to see if I can figure it out... or help James figure it out.

It should prove interesting to see how our ideas play out in actual scenes and play. 

Storn wrote: Brigit having already filled out the sheet, comes up with "Diamond"  The tough as diamonds brick who is a Hilton in this world.  Being a big sister and a damage soak is important to her.

This is a difficult and interesting part of the game, the real character definition, especially as it's done up front before play experience has further informed and clarified things.  I like this particular questionnaire as it's clearer, simpler, and easier to respond to than many others which get very detailed.  It also allows well for not-too-limited continued in-play character definition, a good thing IMHO because (like life) often (if not usually, which I think is more the case) the most interesting character definition occurs there.  But of course setting up characters not to stomp over each other and having a complementary (or otherwise geared towards a particular group dynamic) team to start with is important.  Tools like this are nice aids for that.  I appreciate the write-up of how it went. 

Some comments remind me how difficult it is on a couple fronts that come to mind.  The first is our own ability or lack thereof to bring a vision into fruition, and that has sub-components, one being the ability to articulate and another being the ability to define, among others.  One thing I like about DitV's up-front character creation process is that it includes, even in addition to group creation, an initial individual challenge played out in front of the group which in turn does help to immediately force crystallization of ideas and by example communicate that prior to "real" (group challenge) play.  This questionnaire certainly helps as wel, particularly in terms of at least ensuring thhat everyone understands at a minimum a couple character hooks, by the time it's done.

Another difficulty is the uncertainty that often accompanies character development in the early stages.  Some people feel strongly about not defining much up front, discovering it in play, and defining it by active reaction to the others and the world...I'm not weighing in on that, not the purpose of this thread, but the point simply here is that for some people it's hard to define characters up front.  Questionnaires/processes like this help as the group is together, but are limited in this regard, and I'm not sure of a good way to "force" this issue, anyway.