Yo!

I've been working on this game recently, All Dragons Must Die (ADMD), based on my first endeavor, A Dragon Appears (ADA). Like its predecessor, it is obsessed with stories and abhorrent of math (says the computer scientist), to entreat new roleplayers and keep focus on the story, not the system. Its mechanics are complete and I have good faith in them, so I'll cover them if you want, though my inquiry isn't about mechanics, but rather about gameplay.

Character histories and backstories are a great way to get players involved in their characters and the world, but it's hard to create a backstory for your character if you don't know what all his/her world consists of. That's not an issue if the player made the world, or at least the relevant parts of it. The way ADMD tries to accomplish this is by postponing character creation until the game actually begins. The game starts with the GM "setting the scene", or otherwise offering exposition. This can be anything from a vast world description, to a single cryptic phrase. The GM then passes narrative control to the players with a question, "What do you do?" Implicit in that question is also "Who are you, and how did you get here?" Anything the GM didn't describe is free game for the players to innovate upon. Players get probably a minute of description per level, so a first level character doesn't have a backstory of complexity too grand for such an unknown, while players also have the time they need to come up with something good. As always, the GM is free to veto descriptions and innovations that he doesn't like, such as a first level character being an arena champion, or the most legendary of assassins, or what have you. Players make characters in turn, so each naturally builds on the ideas of their predecessor, or otherwise helps to construct an increasingly colorful world. There's no order to who goes first or last, just who wants to. Theoretically, players could even help each other in the storytelling process, but I'd prefer to see that only if someone is really having trouble, so that each person's voice can be heard.

To make this work, character creation needs to be quick and relatively painless. No long lists of classes or compendiums of abilities to parse. Players are given three boons (facets that help) and flaws (facets that harm, but reward you for being harmed), and a number of professions or combined ranks thereof equal to your level (so a level five could be Nobleman 1 Occultist 1 Pirate 3). Professions are anything, defined more by the group's notions of their capabilities than anything. Maybe priests are also the moneylenders in your society; maybe all noblemen are also hackers, or that lawyers resolve legal conflicts through wrestling. I figure that within a minute, a player can come up with three good things about their character, three bad things, and derive a professional history from where they come from and how they got here, though many groups may need more time. In fact, the time limits are only a guideline, to prevent someone from rambling on forever.

I haven't playtested ADMD yet, so I haven't seen this in action. Do you think it's feasible? Any issues? Thoughts? Derisive comments? Any feedback is appreciated feedback.

Have a look at my game FUBAR, it does something very similar.

In this, the players state 4 things about their characters:

A loosely defined occupation
A form of augmentation (though this could easily be substituted for a race)
A type of people or culture they associate with
A reputation that people know them for

Everything else is made up through the course of play.

It works fairly well in the games I've run so far.

Oh, I'm liking how sleek FUBAR looks. Good to hear something like this works. Thanks for the feedback!