How do you like to create characters?

[glitterbaby]

Hey ya'll. So the question I pose to the playground, as the title suggests, revolves around character creation.My very first campaign I played in my group rolled stats, started at level one, and made most of our decisions at the table. Character concepts were mostly formed through play. It led to characters and a story that felt incredibly organic and authentic. Since then, my group has played other campaigns, most of which we created characters before the first session and using point buy. It was still a lot of fun but I didn't feel as strongly about those characters than my first one. I'd love to hear everyone's opinions on this topic

TLDR; Do you like making characters at the table or coming with them already prepared? Do you prefer the balance of point buy or the authenticity of rolling stats?

[Forrestfire]

Personally, I prefer making characters over some period of time while also communicating with the DM and other players. I feel like throwing a sheet together at the start of a gand would be find for a one-shot or something, but without some time to write and brainstorm, backstory would end up being a bit lacking.

Also, while I enjoy rolling sometimes, I really dislike it in 3.5. The game is as l ready full of holes and imbalance. There's no need to add more.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Making characters takes too long if you start at a level higher than 1. Even for level 1 characters some people i know take a long time to finish, so we generally have the DM tell the players the starting parameters in advance and everyone sends in a character sheet to be checked and approved at least a few days before a new campaign starts.

For the same reason levelling up is done during downtime, even if someone gets enough XP to advance in the middle of a session. Because some people need hours for that, and we actually like to play when we have the time to all get together.

[Phelix-Mu]

I usually come at it from one of two directions, which in the end usually (hopefully) result in a quality concept that I can enjoy playing.

1.) Mechanical/Crunch-Oriented: Sometimes I know what role I need to play in combat, or in the greater context of the party, before I have a character's more fluffy bits down. In this case, I usually aim for something with a low ceiling op-ceiling, then optimize up to an appropriate limit for the group (although sometimes an experimental bit of homebrew has been known to catch my eye, hehe). Then I work on an in-depth look at who that person is, how they got to the present, and how they will likely interact going forward. I really enjoy the psychological end of the pool, so I usually do a good amount of work here (almost as much as I spend on the crunch).

2.) Inspiration-Oriented: Sometimes the fluff of a concept hits me first. In this case, I usually look at the campaign and talk to the DM to see how I can best realize my vision without wrecking the campaign or overshadowing stuff. I appreciate the tier ramifications, and while I like tweaks to improve performance for sub-par classes, I am not married to them and can make even really bad combos into a fun role playing experience (although this may occasionally doom the character to a short, but glorious, lifespan).

[Daishain]

I have a tendency to flesh out characters that I find particularly appealing on my own time. Hell, there's an excel spreadsheet and matching word file on my computer that contain a few dozen class builds and matching (incomplete, awaiting fine background details) character concepts. If starting a new campaign where one would be appropriate, I can just take one of those, make some adjustments to design to fit the campaign purpose/setting, and then finish fleshing out the background/purpose. It seems to work quite well.

[Sir Garanok]

I usually like having the character prepared,though speaking with other party members and making
rp synergies works well.

That usually involves some stat rolling before the preparation period

[Thuphinlok]

I listen to music and when I hear a song that strikes me I try to build a character around the premise of the song (Click Click Boom - became a dual cannon wielding type character, and man do I wish I could find his sheet right now!!) Either that or a nice organic fly by the seat of my pants type thing where I level the character as the character sees fit.

[Ettina]

I think up a neat character concept, toss it around a bit to see if I can get into it, make up a backstory and personality and such, and then make a character sheet and start trying to see if I can get to actually play the character.

[paperarmor]

For me it changes from character to character. Sometimes I go for a mechically sound well thought out and planned build, sometimes I look at Google image search for adventurer or some other noun, or combination thereof, and others I just build a character that I like from fiction and tweak him/her so that its a fairly orinigal spin on the character.

[Warlocknthewind]

It's all fluff that starts my characters. I get a spark of inspiration an mull it over for a long period when I have a skeleton of a backstory and an idea of they're capabilities, I try to find a class that best fits. Often it's nowhere near where I first thought it would end up.

[sideswipe]

i think of a thing i want, like "throw greatswords!" and then i go from there. and i make sure i leave at least one glaring weakness.

[Grayson01]

I have a tendency to flesh out characters that I find particularly appealing on my own time. Hell, there's an excel spreadsheet and matching word file on my computer that contain a few dozen class builds and matching (incomplete, awaiting fine background details) character concepts. If starting a new campaign where one would be appropriate, I can just take one of those, make some adjustments to design to fit the campaign purpose/setting, and then finish fleshing out the background/purpose. It seems to work quite well.

I like this guy ^

For me Character Creation is some of the best part of DnD.
A hate Point Buy and have spent hours rolling stats and making charcters I have Composition note book on my Coffee table that I when I am board start making conepts charcters.

As for if I like doing it before handf or on my own, I liek on my own. I had a DM once who wanted to much control in my characters back story to the point where it stopped feeling like my character.

[Blackhawk748]

My group always does rolled stats, we're pretty generous with that. As far as making the character, mechanically its usually done before i get to session with a basic outline for his backstory. When i get to session i usually help mesh my characters story in with the party's.

[Theomniadept]

My preferred method of making characters; Being the guy I am I like to maintain party balance and I like to let others shine in their areas, so I've never played a tier 1 or 2 class. Tier 3 to me is the sweet spot. I usually pick something I want to do mechanically, something I would find fun or would like to try. I do a bit of optimization revolving around it and think "Why would this mechanical thing exist?" So for example, in the last game I played the reason my Halfling Paladin 6/Beastmaster 1/Halfling Outrider 10 grows the way he does and has the Slow trait and flaw is because storywise he must. Given that halflings make the best use of riding dogs they would naturally grow to know the most about them; thus, I determined that mechanics translating into roleplaying would lead to his family being renowned war dog breeders, in that they raised Warbeast Riding Dogs (CR 3) that would be capable of killing a trained soldier but are exclusively sold to the crown. How would he lose his leg? I decided a bandit attack on the farming community where he lived caused it when somehow these bandits had come into possession of the exact breed of dog sold by his family - dogs attack, leg gets eaten, Slow trait and flaw justified. See what I mean? Mechanics and roleplaying form beautifully into a good story with character growth, development, and strengths and weaknesses making a believable hero (a halfling is not strong but one who raises his mount to be a terror and utilize it on the battlefield is using himself as his own support - easily believable by the unpredictable and physically meek halfling race).

How I ACTUALLY make characters: I am consistently plagued by incredibly bad DMs. TERRIBLE DMs. DMs who think DM fiat is not only the most important tool they have it's the ONLY tool they should ever use. DMs who think railroading the party through really bad, poorly planned 'original world locations' and making us fight their terrible 'original monsters' that are not thought out mechanically in the least is a good idea. DMs who think character Wealth By Level is 10 times too high and players should just use willpower to overcome actual physical limitations, like a fighter somehow just willing himself to bypass DR. DMs who introduce bland, one-dimensional terrible NPCs who all have the exact same attitude, voice, and disposition as the DM himself, trying to force some terrible idea that his fetish-fuel characters are 'cool', when as per story all they do is stand around like a World of Warcraft questgiver who's just so powerful and awesome yet too lazy to go slay one monster who would take one or two hours out of their incredibly important day of standing around.

These are my DMs and they require punishment. Punishment on the Henderson scale. This is why I end up going the 'DM Punishment' route of character creation. See, I give DMs a chance. I give them my best, my optimized and useful Tier 3/4 characters who function in a party but do not outshine it or punish the party. But that isn't good enough. That's when I take my small guns to the military surplus store and trade them in. I won't be needing them. When the DM decides that WBL is optional but still throws the exact same CR monsters in the book at us that are de facto invincible because of his terrible ideas that money is optional, he needs a good punishment. That's how 'snap' characters get made. When the player snaps and decides the DMs terrible story needs to be destroyed from the inside, because having four players tour your terrible world and wait for an enemy to arbitrarily die is BORING.

So this is how things like my Lawful Good Lesser Aasimar nudist come into being. Monk 2/Paladin 2/Pious Templar 1/Swordsage 4/Apostle of Peace 1/Ruby Knight Vindicator 10, uphold Vow of Poverty. He has a backstory involving a cult of Wee Jas that relies on an oracle to perceive one aspect of the person's death upon their birth, in a sort of 'baptism'. Nobody speaks of this to the child until he/she has come of age. In this guy's case, he was predicted to die in the nude. As a worshipper of Wee Jas, this is celebrated and as he comes of age, having been raised in a monastery and practicing the martial arts (in as little clothing as possible), he learns of his destined death (more stories were made as part of his backstory that are a backdrop, like people who deny their death method and end up having it happen anyway, the kind of stuff to flesh out the religion) and he embraces the path set before him.

Story-wise I am justified and mechanically in a low to no WBL game I am now the most powerful character, with Mettle and Evasion and Divine Grace to ensure I never die, Swordsage shenanigans to punch things to unconsciousness, and eentually with a single level of AoP I qualify for the delicious Ruby Knight Windicator, upon which my naked player proceeds to one-round the DM's fetish boss.

[Val666]

mMHMM..Looking over internet/books/forums I always found a new thing/build. That's why I love d&d, you always learn new stuff. I have a couple ("couple") of builds saved so when the time comes, I pick one and make a background working with the DM. Then I usually try to make different personalities for every character and have fun :v

[Extra Anchovies]

I like to first come up with a character build, then look at the weird bits and figure out how and why they happened.

For example, one of the builds (for a game starting at level 4) had a level in ranger (with a pile of cityscape ACFs), then two levels in monk, then another level in ranger (and an alignment change from LN to TN). I decided that he would be a guy who grew up in a large family in the slums (Ranger 1), went in his mid-teens to a monastery so there was one less mouth to feed at home (Monk 1), got gradually fed up with the monks' isolationism and non-interventionism but finished up his basic training anyways (Monk 2), and returned home. While he was away the local mafia had taken over his neighborhood, so he started actively resisting them and in doing so honed his fighting skills (Ranger 2, shift to TN). Eventually the mob got their corrupt politicians to put a price on his head, so he jumped town and now adventures to A) overthrow corrupt regimes elsewhere and B) build up his strength to one day free his home city from the mob's influence.

Another one was a Wizard 1 (with the Conjuration domain) with Precocious Apprentice and Collegiate Wizard; from there he would take three levels in Shadowcaster, and the rest of the build was Noctumancer, a one-level dip into Shadow Adept, and Mystic Theurge to cap it off (with dual ninth-level casting!). I decided that he was at the top of his class at mage college, and his academic standing allowed him (and his fellow soon-to-be valedictorians) access to parts of the library normally off-limits for students. There, he found an old, old book on an ancient style of magic that draws from the Plane of Shadow, rather than the Astral or Elemental planes. He began poring over the tome, practicing over and over to unlock the magical secrets contained within. Independent unsanctioned research, however, was not allowed at his university, so when his side studies were discovered he was expelled (and because he never finished his studies, didn't get all the way to specializing in conjuration, hence the Domain Wizard). He packed his things, made one last trip to the library to steal the book, and now adventures to seek other pieces of hidden magical lore, and also to try out the new and terrible things he's learning about shadow magic.

So yeah. That sorta stuff. I take the strangest part of my build (why does an urban ranger dip into monk? why does a wizard with a head-start [via Collegiate Wizard/Precocious Apprentice] take levels in shadowcaster?) and justify it in-character; from there I build outwards until personality, allies/rivals, and other game-relevant things fall into place.

[Tetraplex]

I've never had a group that didn't take making characters alone for granted, but letting them evolve at the table sounds really interesting!

Most of my concepts are either built around a fun gameplay idea I had or spring fully-fluffed from a piece of music or snippet of spontaneous dialogue in my mind. As a result I've got lots of half-finished characters I'll likely never get to use (whatever happened to that thread?).

[Gracht Grabmaw]

I think up a neat character concept, toss it around a bit to see if I can get into it, make up a backstory and personality and such, and then make a character sheet and start trying to see if I can get to actually play the character.

Pretty much this.
I get an idea, bounce it off the GM a bit until we have a race, class and build that fits and then I introduce the character to the party. More often than not with only a fraction of what the GM and me have already written out for the character for future sessions.