Min Maxing

"I have a 3 intelligence? Outrageous!" Rogar the Barbarian.

After our test character generation exercise, I became slightly worried as a recovering Min/Max gamer. All For One doesn't do anything to protect against creating the swashbuckling fighting machine, and as demonstrated by some of the characters created, it is actually easy to do. In game, if everyone is playing a Min/Maxed character, it works fine. If some are and some are not, it causes problems for both the GM and everyone else in the group. It becomes two different games being played. In order for a GM to challenge the Min/Max character, the bad guys have to be able to stand up to him. The problem becomes, the rest of the character now have no chance against the bad guys. On the other hand, if the GM keeps the villains reasonable, the Min/Max character wades through them like they are mooks.

Additionally, outside of combat, the Min/Max character has nothing to do, so to keep everyone engaged in the game the GM has to hand out lots of fighting. While this isn't a blog about GMing (I leave that to the experts at Gnome Stew) players and their characters definitely have an effect on the GM, his style and how the game plays. I personally don't want to create a well balanced character and be useless in combat. Nor do I want to invest in a lot of skills and abilities I either never get to use, or only get to use them to get to combat I am useless in.

Determining the play style of the group for a specific game can be very important for you during character generation. You don't want to come up with a character that isn't fun to play because he doesn't fit with the groups plays style. Also, players have a certain responsibility to the Game Master and their fellow players to make a character that fits so the game is fun for everyone.

The GM for this game is a long time, very experienced GM. He is usually excellent at bring all players and characters into the story, playing towards their strengths. There is a large group for this game however, and a fractured group of characters will mean more times when players are out of the mix if their characters don't fit the situation. I spoke with him about the Min/Max concerns with this game right after our test run. While he shares some of those concerns, he has not yet come up with specifically what he plans to do if it happens. 

Upon further investigation into the game and rules, I came to the conclusion that he really won't have to do much beyond encouraging players to not Min/Max.

All For One doesn't do anything about Min/Maxing characters for several reasons. The setting/game assumes that game style will reflect a cohesive group and that, if players are playing this game, they won't take the Min/Max route. All For One is not a combat heavy game and as such, the super awesome fighting machine character is pointless to play. Furthermore the super awesome fighting machine character is useless in All For One. In most combat situations killing is not the objective. Trying to create alter the game to make it combat heavy or creating situations where multiple killings doesn't equal multiple murders will quickly destroy the games overall base setting and tone.

All For One is a game designed for balanced characters. Without classes as such, the game, on a basic level, does away with the traditional character roles. Roles that have been further refined and defined by MMOs. There are no strikers, no tanks, no DPS, no leaders, no support character roles in this game system. They are not there for a reason. The game assumes that each character can and should be able to function in almost every situation. You are playing a Musketeer. When you have to fight, you can fight. When you have to dance and impress the nobles, you can dance. When you want to woo the court ladies, you can woo. When you have to search for clues, you know what to look for and who to talk to. Style Points and the die pool play a big part in this. For the most part, having too many dice available for a situation is far worse than not having enough. If a player thinks they need more dice, they can get them. If a player has too many dice, they are wasted. It is assumed that all character will be good enough in everything that they will only need a few more dice to compensate for their poorer skills and attributes to overcome a situation. If the player spent too much in one area, they will need far more Style Points than they could reasonably be expected to have to compensate for their poorer skills and while they will dominate in the area they spent too much in, they do so by wasting dice!

In Summary, All For One doesn't discourage players from Min/Maxing, the Ubiquity system punishes players foolish enough to do it.

Keep rolling my friends.

   

Musketeers assemble!

Earlier in the week my game group got together for an All For One character generation test run. The system is smooth and I really like it. All For One uses a simple point buy generation system. First you pick an Archetype, then a Motivation, then purchase six Primary Attributes which generate six Secondary Attributes, then purchase Skills, then pick one Talent or Resource and finally a flaw if you want one. With the basic character now created the final steps are spending some Starting Experience Points to reflect the characters past and the Finishing Touches (name, history, appearance, background, and so on).

Both the Archetype and Motivation go a long way to defining who the character is. They are broad enough to allow for player input, but give a great deal of guidance right off the bat and help the rest of generation flow. Buying six Primary Attributes with only 15 points might not seem like a lot, but a rating of 2 in this game is human average, so at worst, each character will be above average in half of their attributes. Because the six Secondary Attributes are calculated off the Primary Attributes, the same principle applies. 15 points in skills is a little tricky as several skills have Specializations that also have to be purchased, so 15 points might not go as far as one might think. But Skills are linked to Attributes thus increasing their die pools.

Talents work much like Feats in this game. They give some in game bonus that is unavailable without that Talent. Some are strictly die pools bonuses, some grant the ability to use different Attributes for rolls, some remove restrictions, and some simply let you do something that you otherwise cannot do. None are particularly grand and all they really do is add flavor and a little bit of an edge to the character.

Resources are used in All For One instead of money. And it is the character's decision to purchase what resource level they want for their character. For an old school D&D gamer, this is quite the change! Gold and magic items (or credits and gear or whatever) are not the object in this game at all. The Adventure is what All for One is about. In this game, if you want something and have the Resource level high enough to get it, it's yours. If not, then you have no one to blame but yourself!

I really like games that have flaws as characteristics. It adds something to a character to not be perfect. While Archetype and Motivation define a lot about a character, the flaw makes them fun to play. In All for One, flaws are optional. All they do is add flavor. Oh, and the opportunity to earn Style Points. Style Points add to your die pool. The die pool is how many dice you roll to determine if you are successful or not in what you are doing.  Style points also reduce damage or boost talents. All in all, they are what makes your character better or luckier than the average shmuck off the street.

Generating these character was more of a learning exercise than anything else. No one in the group has played in a Ubiquity system before and the GM wanted to see what character generation was like. Following my running theme for the Blog, I think this was an excellent exercise. Putting it simply, a character generated for the first time in a new rule system doesn't have the same chance of being a truly great character as one generated after a player has some level experience. Next up will be a actual test game where we take the rules out for a spin using pre-generated characters.

Till then, keep rolling my friends!

Typecasting

“You, boy, are arrogant, hot tempered and entirely too bold. I like that. Reminds me of me.” – Porthos, 1993 Three Musketeers 

Have you ever seen Top Gun? A Few Good Men? Days of Thunder? The Firm? If not, I’d recommend them, as they are good movies. They all have something in common; Tom Cruise plays the lead role in each. In Top Gun the lead character is Tom Cruise the Navy Pilot, in a few Good Men it’s Tom Cruise the Navy lawyer, in Days of Thunder it’s Tom Cruise the racecar driver, in the Firm it’s Tom Cruise the lawyer again. All of these movies have different lead characters, but Tom Cruise plays the role. And no one plays Tom Cruise like Tom Cruise.

Some role-players are like that too. I know I am. One of my GMs recently commented about my character Logan. He said ‘He’s got a lot of Erland in him”. Arrogant, sarcastic, power hungry, gentlemanly… yup that’s Erland… and Logan… and come to think of it that’s most of my characters.

I’ll be the first to admit that I am not a good actor. I know I can role-play other personalities, I’ve seen me do it. So why do most of my character’s share the same personality traits? Typecasting. I am both good at and enjoy playing those personality traits, so when it comes time to roll-up my character, those are the ones I’m predisposed towards.

In All For One, I will be playing a Musketeer. Arrogant, sarcastic and gentlemanly does fit well with a Musketeer. I could type cast myself again and go with what I know I am good at and enjoy. On the other hand I could craft a different personality for Jean Baptiste and challenge myself. Both options have advantages and disadvantages.

If I play him like my ‘normal’ character, I am sure he will be well played and I will enjoy him as a character. I  risk having him be normal and uninspiring in both my own and fellow players eyes. If however, I challenge myself and play a different personality it increases the chances that he will be a memorable character. Assuming I pull it off. If not, he could be a disaster and no fun to play.

As my goal is create and play a ‘great character’, I am going to take the risk and go outside of my normal role and take Jean Baptiste in another direction.

Musketeer says flamboyant to me. So that will be the first personality trait I choose for him. Why break down a door, when a perfectly good window and rope is available? Why take the evidence of a traitorous noble too the king when you can throw it on the floor in front of him as a challenge him as a traitor in front of the king? 

Next I usually go with sarcastic because I am sarcastic in real life. I don’t think I would enjoy playing a humorless character and don’t want Jean Baptiste to be sarcastic. So the second personality trait I have chosen for him is good-natured. He is funny and enjoys a good laugh, either at himself or at others, as long as it is safe, good humor fun. Jean Baptiste enjoys life and what he does.

Lastly (three traits seem good to start with) I need something that explains why his personality lends itself to be a Musketeer. This isn’t his motivation, that is actually a step in character creation, rather it what makes him fit as a Musketeer. For the last one, I picked caring. Jean Baptiste is the sort of man who helps little old ladies carry their bag, who steps in to stop a bully, who hands his last few coins to the starving man on the street. He is not a priest and hasn’t devoted his life to helping other, but he doesn’t turn his back when he sees someone in need.

In summary; There is nothing wrong with being type casted in a certain role, but sometimes it’s nice to try a different personality for your character. Choose one that fits both yourself and the game.

Jean Baptiste – Caring, Good-natured and flamboyant – All for one, and one for all!

The Character Creation Section

"I am Jean Baptiste De La Pointe of his most Christian Majesty, Louis the XIII, Musketeers, at your service madam"

For whatever reason, I always get more of a feel for a character when he's got a name. A few quick Google searches for seventieth century French names and I came up with Jean Baptiste. I like the name because it's authentic and was popular during the 1600's in France. Plus it reminds me of Zorg from The Fifth Element (one of my favorite movies). De La Pointe is also authentic for the time period, but less popular.

After reading though the book I re-read the character creation section. There are a lot of Blog posts about the character creation section in RPG's. Opinions vary greatly from 'love them' to 'useless'. Personally, my opinion has evolved over the years. If they are well written, I have always seen them as a good resource. Normally information is presented in a liner fashion and all in one place making it easy to look up. Now, I also see them as the best guideline you are going to get for a given game. In All for One, the character creation section takes you step by step through creating a Musketeer. More importantly, it takes you step by step through creating a Musketeer. I know I just said that twice, but consider, All for One is a game designed specifically for playing a classical, right out of the movies or books, Musketeer. The character creation section in All for One and just about every other game on the market is geared towards making exactly the kind of character the game is designed for.

This is a valuable resource for both novice and experienced players. Many role-playing games produced these days are setting specific games. They are designed with a specific genre and style in mind. The character creation chapter(s) presented in the rules are likewise designed to roll up a character that fits within that genre and style. This is the type of character that the game was most likely play-tested with. As such this is the type of character that works in the game.

Almost all of these games present themselves as flexible to appeal to a larger audience. In fact many games are built these days using mechanical systems designed for other games. Some systems even claim universal setting adaptability. Other types of characters may work within the genre and style just fine, but it's always best to remember that the character created using the chapter(s) presented in the book(s) are always what the writers had in mind when making the game.

Game writers, like GMs, are usually loath to tell players what kind or style of character they should roll up. Guidelines are presented, but there is almost always loopholes and ways to go way outside of the box. Players like to make really cool and or unusual characters. GMs are no more immune to this rule-of-cool approach than their players are. But every step outside of the guidelines represents something that has to be worked into the game, or around in game, or added to the game, or subtracted to the game. In other words, something that is just as likely to be a problem as it is to be cool.

Besides, I have not as of yet, in my two and a half decades of playing, found a character creation section in a rule book that makes cookie-cutter generic characters. Following the guidelines in the books and a little imagination provides for a nearly infinite variety of characters that are just as cool and unusual as characters that are made up ignoring the text suggestions. With the added bonus that they almost always work in game.

In summary, the character creation section presented in the rule books is a valuable resource, don't be opposed to using it.

All For One

As previously mentioned in my first post, the original reason for this blog was to chronicle the creation of a new character for the campaign that my group is starting soon. That game is All for One: Règime Diabolique, by Paul "Wiggy" Wade-Williams, A Triple Ace Games product using the Ubiquity System (Exile Games Studio).

My processes started with avoiding one of the biggest flaws of character creation; making a character that won’t live up to expectations. So I read the rules. All of the rules (except the GM section of course), including side bars and flavor text. Because I’ve never played in the ubiquity system I needed not only a grasp of the mechanics of the game, but also the setting and flavor of the game. Then, I spoke with my friend who will be running the game to get his vision of the campaign. While a lot of that is still up in the air at this point (I’ve read more of the book than he has), I think I have a good idea of what the game will be like. At very least I have enough information to start working on some character ideas.

Before reading the book I came up with a character concept based solely on our groups' initial discussion of the campaign. I knew it was going to be a time period, swashbuckling type game in which we will all be playing a Musketeer. I had no actual intention of using this concept, but wanted to see what I could come up with using the ‘rule of cool’. Here is the concept:

• I decide that this character was going to be an Englishman who was born in the Orient. Everyone else is likely going to be French, so I went with something different.
• From a young age, he was trained in oriental arts to be a spy for Lord Buckingham. Because ninja's are always cool. And for a sword-fighting game what could be better?
• After working in France as spy, he comes to realize that Buckingham and Richelieu are both without honor so he defects and becomes a spy for the King. A little motivation for the character here, already have a built in animosity for the two biggest baddies of the time period.
• Later he is recruited into the Musketeers. 
• He is a hand-to-hand or stealth assassination guy; his Ninja arts take the form of stealth and magic-like affects. Combat style and skills defined here.
• The English, have a price on his head for his betrayal and he’s constantly on the run from their agents. Built in hook for the GM

Cool character concept. I’m sure you already have a vision/expectation of what this character would play like.

Here are the issues: First, the GM is planning on a French political & court romance style swashbuckler game (the book not only supports this type of game, it is actually the default). The English will most likely not be part of his plans because there is enough going on in France that an outside antagonist isn’t necessary. While the GM might throw the character a bone now and then, for the most part, his whole background is a waste of any useful story material for the campaign. Second, the vision for what the character does/acts doesn't relate to the story the GM is planning on telling. A romance style swashbuckler game is larger than life, full of grand fights, heroes swinging from chandlers and duels at dawn. The sneaky guy doesn't fit. A foreigner will be out of place at social event unless he is someone famous or extremely charming. He will be mistrusted in an age of mistrust thus limiting his chances to participate in the social aspect of the game. Third, while I might be able to make this character within the rule system, he’s not going to work well. Fights are suppose to be long, drawn out and dramatic duels; as such the game mechanic doesn’t support a stealth assassination. Also, the magic system really cannot double for anything resembling the ‘Ninja arts’. Throw in werewolves, vampires and demons, and now the character now is really out of place. All in all, the character will be weaker and less effective than intended. He certainly will not live up to the expectations of the original character concept.

Of course this character concept would be a challenge to role-play and that might appeal to some players. However, it also has a lot of potential to become frustrating in this game for everyone at the table. A few tweaks could go a long way towards making the concept work better. However, having read the rules and knowing the system and setting, a much better concept can easily be developed.

In summary; coming up with the concept before doing your due diligence is a mistake, read the book.

Who's 'That Guy'?

That Guy is a Great Character. Which is, unfortunately, almost totally subjective. There are no rules for Great Characters, no method for creating them, no way to even define them. Great Characters are like pornography. I cannot tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it.

None the less, my goal is to create a Great Character. So, there has to be something that I can use to guide me on the way. And there is. Because it is almost totally subjective and because it will be my character, it is my subjectivity that counts.

While there is no way to define what a Great Character is (there are some things they definitely are not), there are a few things they all have in common.

Great Characters are fun. RPG's are a hobby. We play the games to have fun. If it wasn't fun, we wouldn't play. You can have a mediocre character and still have fun playing the game. After all, you're most likely gaming with your friends doing something you enjoy doing. Great Characters always add to the fun of playing for both you and everyone else at the table. It's a subtle difference. Having John at the table playing the game is fun. Having John playing Starstrider in the game is more fun. (Please note that both John and Star strider are fictional and any resemblance to real people or characters is just dumb luck).

Great Characters fit. The game master is telling the story, and every story teller loves to have great characters in their stories. A good game master can pull players and characters into the story and craft things around characters when necessary. Great Characters, by their very nature, contribute to the story and rarely need to be worked around. They fit the setting and the campaign. They don't play in the story, they are part of the story.

Finally, Great Characters are memorable for the right reasons. They almost take on a life of their own. Their players are invested in them and play the character, not the game. With the result being, the character becoming almost a separate person. It's like watching an actor in a movie. You know it's Johnny Depp, but you are seeing Jack Sparrow (sorry, Captain Jack Sparrow).

Bio

I get annoyed reading blogs without knowing anything about the author, so I am starting this one with a little Bio on the off chance that someone might read it. Hey, it could happen. I’m Thom (yes, spelled with the ‘h’ and pronounced without it) and I go by the screen name Erland (or Erland Nimz). I’ve been a gamer for 26 years; I’m overweight, bald with a goatee, never kissed a girl and still live in my parent’s basement. No, not really, well, not the last two anyway.

I game weekly (Sunday nights) in a three week rotating game schedule. I play in two games and am the G.M. of the third. I’m a RPG gamer who sometimes dabbles in MMO’s when I have the time. I don't play board games, card games or mini’s, they really aren't my style. From old school red box (although my first one was brown) Dungeons and Dragons to yellow box Marvel Comic’s Superheroes (Karma for RED!) I’ve played a lot of systems and styles. I would best describe myself as a recovering Min/Max Hack/Slash gamer. Not that there is anything wrong with playing that way, but as I have gotten older the setting and story have slowly taken on more importance for me. These days it’s more fun to tell the tale of how I cut the demon’s head off with my +5 Vorpal Sword of Badassness than it is to actually do the cutting.

So that’s me and this is my blog. Why a blog? I’m glad you asked. In my gaming group, one of our weekly games is coming to a scheduled ending and a new game will be replacing it. We decided this before Gen Con 2011 (great time btw) so I have been thinking and getting excited about the new game. I also had an epiphany. I don’t really like my character in the game that’s ending. I like the system and the setting. The G.M. has a great story and plot and the character is actually a cool concept. He’s just not… ‘that guy’.

You know the guy I’m talking about. That character you sit around with your friends and tell stories about. That character from the legendary campaign that loved playing in. That character that you thought about at work or school instead of work or school.

That guy. The Han Solo of characters, the John McClain of characters.

My character in the other campaign I play in (Erick Wujcik Phage Press, Amber, Diceless System) isn't ‘that guy’ either, but he has the potential to be. One of the characters in the campaign I am running (Margaret Weis Productions, Serenity, Cortex System) is ‘that guy’. In fact, that campaign has ‘that guy’ and a couple of potential ‘that guys’!

I want to be playing ‘that guy’; I want all of my character’s to be ‘that guy’.

Being me and having the time to really think about the new campaign, I decided to put in the extra time and effort to think about, research and chronicle the new character. So, a blog. And as I am starting one; I decided not to limit it to an online journal about the new character, but instead to make it a complete role-playing blog. I am looking at it as a chance to expand my hobby by writing about it.