Character Creation Methods in TTRPGs | Design Discussion

[@Luykosaurus]

Thank you for mentioning my game 😁. I am actually working on a random character generator so soon you will have both options in my system between 100% contol and 100% random.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Oh wow, a random generator for IWS would be rad! 🤠

[@Luykosaurus]

@@TalesFromElsewhereGames Yes. It will use the character role tags so that the features and Abilities will roughly fit together. My current estimate is that at least 80% of the generated characters will be viable. It already generates an Archetype, Sub-Archetype, Path, and one Lesser Talent. There is still some work to be done, but it could be done next week if everything goes according to plan. (But lets be honest, it rarely goes according to plan...)

[@salty-nick]

When IWS was mentioned, I pointed at the screen like the DiCaprio meme.

[@OdinsKeyGaming]

Ishanekon: World Shapers has a crazy amount of options! I tend to lean towards more fluidity/flexibility, but there is merit to some systems having a more rigid structure for character creation. Awesome to see the public TfE Surviver creation! Can't wait to play more!

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Thanks, buddy! 🤠

[@pathwaystoadventure]

For Pathways to Adventure, you begin with an almost entirely rigid system at level 1 character creation, as every class has fixed stats and abilities they begin with, but with 30 Class options to choose from to help hopefully catch the vibe you are going for. Then every level beyond that is completely fluid in how you want to develop your character and the abilities they gain. This helps thread the needle between both methods to allow for character customization while also preventing "bad" characters, as you have a fixed starting point of a balanced character. Combine that with the Ancestries (races) and Backgrounds providing additional customization options, and you have a lot of permutations with few to no "useless" combinations.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

@@pathwaystoadventure Yeah! I remember PtA having a nice balance of packeted structures (rigid) with lots of interesting choices to make. That way, you can count on a baseline power for a character before customization begins.

[@FineGroundCryptids]

Another fantastic deep dive :) Loved making my character in TFE, flowed very well and I felt like I had control one the actual design

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Thank you, my friend! 🤠

[@FrankJosephHall]

Dang it, you beat us to the punch about talking about character creation! We will remember this Peter… Great video as always

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Haha oh no, did you have one recorded?! ❤🤠

[@FrankJosephHall]

No, it was just in our list of topics to cover. But you basically hit everything I wanted to talk about

[@LeFlamel]

Very nice video. My current system is very rigid when it comes to combat (class), but looser with skills (point buy), and very loose with more narrative traits (backstory, culture, etc). Could roll for everything besides skills or choose, but the reason for the sliding gradient of rigidity between combat and non-combat is because I don't want character creation effort to be spent on combat effectiveness, which is the least interesting element of a character (even if combat itself can be fun). Which lead to my latest design decision to randomize spells daily.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Love hearing about "hybrid approaches" like this. There's no reason to pick a certain point on these spectrums and apply it to ALL aspects of character creation or design. There's so much interesting space within there to explore! 🤠

[@conceptarthur]

Another cool video! (I am catching up on the releases) 1) One thing that I learned to appreciate from the OSR gang is how the "funnel proccess" indeed does create expendable characters. But at the same time, you learn to care for those who survive. More than once in Mörk Borg I did feel for some wretch I had to flatten due to their bad rolls. 2) I like how you build the packages in TfE. I always felt that Blades in the Dark left the newcomers in the...dark when creating the character. It is hard to assign something relataed to background and ancestry in your first sessions (specially when the GM is green as well). 3) Also: GURPS! Automatically LIKE. Congrats on the video!

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Thank you, my friend! And I agree about the OSR/"funnel" process. I think I phrased it too starkly in the video; you can still absolutely grow to love a character, no matter if they're random or controlled in creation 🤠

[@TwinSteel]

🥳🫂👍🏿 Character creation can become its own game 😄

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Fastest draw in the west! 🤠

[@thegreatandterrible4508]

Literally one of my GM friends and I with Mutants and Masterminds. Or Traveller in a very different way.

[@TwinSteel]

⚡️ 🔫 💨

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

@@thegreatandterrible4508 I had so much fun back in the day makin' characters in M&M! Super fun character builder!

[@ivanhagstrom5601]

Very cool! I think a potential drawback of a more fluid system, is that it requires more knowledge on the player's side to built the character that they want. In your example, the player who wants to play a gunslinger has to know that they need the deadeye category of edges and the ranged skill. And then they need to know which professions, cultures and incidents give access to that category and skill. If there are many options that can become difficult. I can think of some ways to mitigate this knowledge requirement. The first is to list the categories accessible through a background clearly in the background description (as in tfe), instead of listing requirements on the skills and edges themselves. The second is to use very informative and intuitive names for edges and other things. In a very rigid game like dnd5e, it's fine to have cool sounding names like Purple Dragon Knight. But in a high fluidity game you need to be able to understand what the thing does immediately, so maybe a name like Commander would be more appropriate. The third way is to just include short descriptions on what players should expect from different categories and such. So that they can get a quick overview and decide whether it gives them what they need or not. If you know of more ways, please let me know! Because this is a problem I've encountered in my own game which you could say is also high fluidity and high control.

[@Luykosaurus]

I have implemented some of the points you mentioned, but here are some other solutions I used to tackle this problem in Ishanekon: World Shapers: 1) I added role tags to all Sub-Archetyps, features, and Abilities such as melee weapon user or support, to help you find what you need. 2) I added a Beginner and Core tag to limit the options to something more manageable for first-time players. Beginner is roughly 15 % of the content, while core is 50%. 3) I added a complexity tag from 1 to 4 to warn newer players to not take overly complicated features. 4) I am building a random character generator that combines all three mentioned systems to help you get started quickly if you do not know where to start.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

These are good points, for sure! And I agree; when having things be more freeform, you need to communicate to the reader effectively, so they are making informed decisions. 🤠

[@harmen4750]

I love this video! I'm in the middle of developing my own game and also use the same 3 steps in character creation to determine your starting skills. Culture, profession and life events. Very cool to hear you talk about it!

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

So glad you enjoyed it! 🤠

[@LB_adventurer]

this is my first time viewing your channel. I'm subscribed now. I've been creating my own TTRPG's for years on my own so getting free info and advice is very much appreciated

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

That means a lot to hear! I'm so glad you're findin' it useful! 🤠

[@ICLHStudio]

I feel like your example highlights a 3rd axis to consider; how much or how overtly narrative aspects are built into the system itself. It sounds like Tales from Elsewhere is on the heavier side of narrative systems in character creation, tying mechanical choices and things like backstory stuff together much more directly than the more D&D/PF style ones tend to. And, to me anyway, that feels _way_ more restrictive than even the most rigid class systems I've played, and I find is the kind of thing that has a huge impact on how much or how little a game appeals to me (partly, I think it just doesn't tend to work well with the way that I like to create or develop characters). I'm trying to think of a good name for that aspect, "narrative prescriptiveness" comes to mind, but I'm not sure if that sounds too negative of fully covers it quite right; I may not usually like that kind of system much, but that doesn't mean it's inherently a bad system or anything. But I do think that it's an enormously important factor to consider in designing and analyzing a system (as well as choosing or preparing to play or run it).

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Ah yes, that's a very good point. That sort of speaks toward how much a game is designed with a specific world or narrative in mind versus ones that are more setting-neutral. You have games like GURPs on one end and extremely restricted games like Eat the Reich on the other, where you only have access to pregens! In this video I suppose I was only speaking about rigidity of mechanical options, not rigidity of narrative options. As always, there's so much more nuance than I can cover in these videos, so I appreciate y'all comin' into the comments to break it down more with me! 🤠

[@ShrodingerFu]

One of the things that I value in a rigid system is built-in specialization. If no one can be as sneaky as the rogue - the game can spotlight the rogue with stealth missions where the rogue can sneak ahead of the party. The more specialized a character is, the less likely they will have an answer for everything and will have to rely on their party for help. I'm liking what I've seen of your approach to Tales from Elsewhere. I might find myself doing something similar for my own game.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Agreed! that "packeting", that specialization, can make a character feel unique. They have certain features or abilities that are special to them, that no one else can do! 🤠

[@ShrodingerFu]

@@TalesFromElsewhereGames The spotlight is certainly a part of what I like about specialization for my game. But I would say in equal measure it's about not having the tools to do everything by yourself. And both of these build into the core theme of my game - collective action.

[@psychone8064]

Hey we were just talking about the insane number of options in GURPS in a comment on one of your recent videos 😊 Another banger as always. These videos really help me because I’ve got a lot happening in this season of life (9 month olds are chaotic!) and I don’t have as much time to get into deep thoughts on game design. Keep up the good work!

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Haha yep! I thought to myself, "This person sees the future"!! Really appreciate the positive feedback; so glad you're enjoying them! (And congrats on the little one!) 🤠

[@Drudenfusz]

I usually refer to that rigid design approach as template designs, thus classes in D&D, playbooks in PbtA, the clans in VtM, and so on are all templates that provide guidance. And I think especially the WoD systems got to a neat sweet spot, one that sets the templates up to fulfil a theme but still allows plenty of liberty to customise how one sees fit. And so that inspired me in my early design work, but I moved past it, since I have no need for balance, nor does anything I do comes with stats any longer, and so I can leave it to the players to make their own thematic compositions when building characters and be frank about it in the character creation segment of my system.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

I really enjoy the process of finding that sweet spot for a system! 🤠

[@AndrusPr8]

8:50 I disagree. The amount of time doesn't have to do with "more" or "less" control. It is directly the result of the number of choices they need to make. I designed a CoC PBTA game of My own. Players choose how to diatribute their 6 stats, 1 job, 2 skills associated to their job, 2 skills of their own, 1 optional "trauma or injury" in exchange for 1 extra skill. In 5 min You have a character. 100% control Meanwhile, the Infamous FATAL makes You roll over 200 times for character creation. A process that takes maybe several days to complete. 100% random generated chatacter

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

That's a very good point; number of decision points is the scaler. However, randomization is one methodology that can be used to reduce number of player decisions. But you're right, none of these operate in a vacuum!

[@beardyben7848]

Side note, the other side of not being as attached to a rapid, somewhat randomized character creation is that when one survives for multiple adventures, you feel more attached. As you play them, you learn how they interact with the world, and who they are. Just like video games with multiple decisions, although the character starts a little generic, they take on a distinct personality and approach through play. Ttrpgs taught video game makers this process. It is important to understand that the Old School games that pioneered this approach also had left most expertise or skill open ended, implying that a general background or life experience was sufficient to attempt or succeed at a non class specific task. In contrast, WHFRP just had you pick a career like rat-catcher, gave you the option to change at the end of leveling it, and expected you to do your best with what you got. Of course that game was concieved as a low-power fantasy horror comedy game, so design matters for theme or play experience, as always.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

That's a very good point to make. It's always tough in these videos; I can't always dig deep into specific points like this, so I gloss over them when speaking in a general sense. This is doubly true when I speak about OSR; I don't have intimate familiarity with that design space, and the OSR community isn't a monolith! Anyway, I appreciate your comment and the points you brought up! 🤠

[@beardyben7848]

@@TalesFromElsewhereGames thanks for responding with some thought. Of course you need to focus the video, or you end up with long video essays, and more research and editing. I just want to offer information and some small insight. Your video made me think, and that's great.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

@@beardyben7848 Absolutely! I really do value these comments! When I launched this YT channel 4 months ago, I was a bit worried about vitriolic comments and such, but what I've found is that most folks offer intelligent and insightful feedback! Cheers!

[@beardyben7848]

@@TalesFromElsewhereGames As long as you aren't giving hot takes, engaging with short form social media, or chasing the clicks, you will have less B.S. I have found lots of really intelligent comments on channels and videos about creating or building things. A lot of creators are interested in what other people are making and doing and want to contribute or engage in polite parasocial conversation like this. I don't always agree in my comments, but I tend to avoid conflict here. "Never pick a fight with a pig. They'll drag you into the mud and then beat you with experience(or sociopathy)."

[@MastertheGamerpg]

Great video!

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Thank you, my friend! 🤠

[@davidmorgan6896]

While you can use a point buy system, like GURPS, to build an analogue of a character class this seems to be a huge waste of potential. Yes, I could build a generic Cleric(TM), but I could also build a Priest of the Sun, whose strength grows until midday and then wanes, who is cursed with leprosy and a scarred face, but who has a near magical gift for storytelling. What's more, even if your character starts off looking like something out of D&D, it can grow in any way you want. A priest could learn lock-picking, a fighter could learn to sneak or develop rapid healing - depending on the options the GM allows.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Oh totally agreed! In the video, I was just pointing out that the methodology for creating a character doesn't necessarily impact the end result; as in, whether it's a Class or like GURPs, you COULD make the same character in both (theoretically). The methodology for character creation is very distinct from the resulting character structures, if that makes sense! Thanks for checking out the video and leaving a comment, really means a lot! 🤠

[@PjotrFrank]

Man! Great video. 🥃

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Appreciate it, buddy! 🤠

[@SpazaliciousChaos]

I'm really curious where you would rate the game I'm working on as far as the rigid-fluid axis is concerned. As of this writing, Dungeon Plunder Specialists is assumed to be human centric, and has a highly random character generation process where results of 4d6 (add together to get a Passive stat, record each d6 result for 4 Active stats) are rolled in eight Groups and assigned as desired. But from there, the only real choice left is Profession (one of those eight Groups) and a selection of gear. The game rules are going to be mostly about gear and what gear can do, with the character mostly there to be a action adventure protagonist that gets to use gear to better gear, with the stats mostly there to inform what kind of gear they can make best use of.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

That sounds more on the rigid side of things, at least from that brief description. Though to reiterate, rigid isn't BAD, it's just a different approach! The attributes themselves look random and pretty fluid, but in the end attributes aren't always the most "meaty" part of a character creation process. Again, tough to say without seeing the rules in context 🤠

[@tubebobwil]

Great video, again, background music is distracting just as the bubble pop transition sounds were. For me, with my neural wiring, the music should be half the volume in future videos that it was in this one.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Thanks for the feedback! I'll pass it along to the editor 🤠

[@DmDungeonMastery]

Yeehaw

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

🤠

[@_fedmar_]

Question: where does random character generation fall on this spectrum? (answer: it doesn't, probably?)

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Gotta keep watchin' 😉I do talk about Control vs. Randomization in it, as well! It's a separate axis from the Rigidity one.

[@mkklassicmk3895]

I dont think a "class" system is actually any easier to balance. I dont find D&D nor PF2 to be particularly well balanced and they are the poster children for that sort of game. I am not sure you can actually balance a TTRPG, some choices will always be better than others. I think the goal should just be not to make anything that is completely broken or overpowered. Class games are easier to make a character for but that is really the only positive thing they have going for them in my opinion.

[@davidmorgan6896]

Yes, agreed. I'd go further and say that I don't even see balance as an advantage. That said, if you roll low in D&D you end up with a weak character. In GURPS fantasy or Fantasy Hero everyone gets the same number of points and so everyone can have an equally capable character.

[@mkklassicmk3895]

@@davidmorgan6896 I totally agree. I had to rethink the whole concept of game balance in order to use the combat and magic systems that I wanted to use in my homemade game system.

[@LeFlamel]

PF2 not being balanced is a hot take, what makes you say that?

[@LeFlamel]

Having the same number of points to allocate doesn't guarantee balance since some choices are inevitably better than others.

[@mkklassicmk3895]

@@LeFlamel There are clearly choices that are better than other choices in PF2, which means it isn't balanced. There is not a lot of ways to avoid it with that type of game system. I don't think anyone is claiming that point allocation is more balanced than a random system. The point was with a random system you end up with a randomly crap character sometimes. At least with point allocation you have to do that to yourself. The only real issue with point allocation is min/maxing which isn't really much of a problem unless you are attempting to overbalance things.