Character Idol- How To Find the BEST Characters.

[Haldir]

This topic has been cropping up recently on several threads, but I am not in the mood for hijacking when I am interested in such a deep analysis.

I would like to develop a method for receiving 20 character submissions and determining, with the most objectivity possible, which single one is the best. If it could be done in a 3-4 hour process, that'd be ideal. The system is likely to be D&D 5e for simplicity sake- it's ubiquitous, easy to learn, and the balance issues are negligible enough to make analysis possible. The overall goal of this process, from my viewpoint, is to find the most compelling and enjoyable character from the given. The keyword here is HERO. We're looking for heroes.

METRICS

This is the area where I trust the Playground more than any other to give me solid suggestions. If you nerds put your minds too it you'll debate this endlessly, and hopefully we can get some usable data from the chaos.

The end goal of this metric system is the creation of a rubric that can help us determine in a timely manner if a character has the greatness we are looking for.

Personal Traits-
1. Basic Character Traits -
2. Somewhat Developed Traits-
3. Developed Traits, Some Very Unique-
4. Purely Unique and Actualized Character

History-
1 Very common or uninspired backstory
2 Somewhat Interesting backstory, mostly uninspired
3 A Good backstory with Interesting Elements
4 Purely unique and integrated backstory

Strengths-
1 Characters strengths are very common or generalized
2 Character strengths are somewhat more developed.
3 Character strengths are strongly developed and interesting
4 Strengths are unique and integrated fully into character personality

Weaknesses-
1. Weaknesses are bland or one dimensional
2 Character has weaknesses that are marginally thought out
3 Character weaknesses are developed and interesting
4 Full integration of character weaknesses into personality and story.

Abilities-

Characters abilities are formulaic or derived strictly from other sources.
Character abilities are beginning to be developed and integrated
Character abilities are well integrated into characters personality
Unique abilities or abilities perfectly reflecting characters personality



Growth/Potential-

Character has no room for growth or challenges
Character has some room to grow and overcome.
Character has taken some steps to identify potential for solving problems
Character has unique and well developed growth opportunities integrated



Personal Motivations-

Characters motivations are not developed well at all, or are very cliche.
Some consideration given to good motivations, but still rather bland.
Character has developed motivations, somewhat integrated into the story
Characters motivations are unique and well integrated into story and personality.



Likability-

Player is not able to convey the fun of their character
Character would be somewhat fun to watch
Character seems like it’d be quite interesting
Character is an absolute blast to watch and always entertains.



Playability-

Character is not well played, doesn’t achieve its basic function
Character is somewhat good at its stated role
Character is well played, but still acts inconsistently
Character is played very consistently, and achieves goals



Legality-

Many violations of the game rules, character relies on incorrect rulings
Violations are present and form large portion of the character
Violations are small and easily fixed.
Rules are followed completely and to the letter

[RFLS]

Wrong sub, to start with, if you're going for 5e.

And there's no such thing as a "best" character. It's about as subjective as you can get. Every single one of your categories is subjective to some degree; there's no way you're getting an objective answer out of that.

[D+1]

I'd say just look at what you're patterning the procedure after - American Idol, X-factor, X's Got Talent, et. al. You've got a judge panel doing the initial selection and critiques. So take your bazillion characters and give them an audition. Three strikes and they're out. Rate them pass/fail on your list:

Personal Traits
History
Strengths
Weaknesses
Abilities
Growth/Potential
Overall Uniqueness
Personal Motivations
Likability
Playability
Legality

If they fail three of those they're not worth looking at any further. Once they reach the end of the list with 2 strikes or less, they proceed to the next round. If they have no strikes they golden buzzer straight to the finals. For the second round however, look at the ones with two strikes. Can a strike be improved or overlooked due to strength in other areas? If so they pass to round three. Otherwise they go home. Anyone in round three should only have one strike but same process - either the aspect that's keeping them down gets fixed or marked irrelevant due to other strengths and they go to the finals, or they go away. In the finals ANY of the characters left should be okay to run, but you just pit them against each other two at a time until winner takes all - or you decide to just roll a die to choose.

[Haldir]

I'd say just look at what you're patterning the procedure after - American Idol, X-factor, X's Got Talent, et. al. You've got a judge panel doing the initial selection and critiques. So take your bazillion characters and give them an audition. Three strikes and they're out. Rate them pass/fail on your list:

/snip/

If they fail three of those they're not worth looking at any further. Once they reach the end of the list with 2 strikes or less, they proceed to the next round. If they have no strikes they golden buzzer straight to the finals. For the second round however, look at the ones with two strikes. Can a strike be improved or overlooked due to strength in other areas? If so they pass to round three. Otherwise they go home. Anyone in round three should only have one strike but same process - either the aspect that's keeping them down gets fixed or marked irrelevant due to other strengths and they go to the finals, or they go away. In the finals ANY of the characters left should be okay to run, but you just pit them against each other two at a time until winner takes all - or you decide to just roll a die to choose.

You've actually ALMOST hit the nail on the head here with the rest of the process we are planning. It's actually going to be slightly more involved than just interviews- but we're still in the planning stages right now, which I why I wanted this thread to focus mostly on the creation of a rubric. I like the way you're thinking though, because this is too subjective to leave to one rubric and one judgement, and I'm a firm believer in allowing an editing process for our potential writers.



/snip- Only one category relates to rules, and that's just because we want writers who can follow directions/

And there's no such thing as a "best" character. It's about as subjective as you can get. Every single one of your categories is subjective to some degree; there's no way you're getting an objective answer out of that.


I reject the idea that subjective things can't be judged with rigor. People judge singing, cooking, and myriad other things that are definitely subjective, but can be analyzed with some validity on technique, style, and a sort of zeitgeist of preferences. If you fervently believe that characters shouldn't be judged, that's fine, you're probably not what we're looking for anyway, but don't say that it can't be done and then not offer anything helpful, please.

[RFLS]

I reject the idea that subjective things can't be judged with rigor. People judge singing, cooking, and myriad other things that are definitely subjective, but can be analyzed with some validity on technique, style, and a sort of zeitgeist of preferences. If you fervently believe that characters shouldn't be judged, that's fine, you're probably not what we're looking for anyway, but don't say that it can't be done and then not offer anything helpful, please.

Sure. Here's helpful: type of game is going to be what the concept is graded against. If I show up with a Paladin-esque character to a Shadowrun game, that character will be a bad fit. A heavy metal vocalist might be fantastic, but they're probably not going to do well as a jazz singer. The entire rubric has to be set against the genre and even specific group to be useful at all. Context is key with subjective judging.

[Florian]

I reject the idea that subjective things can't be judged with rigor. People judge singing, cooking, and myriad other things that are definitely subjective, but can be analyzed with some validity on technique, style, and a sort of zeitgeist of preferences. If you fervently believe that characters shouldn't be judged, that's fine, you're probably not what we're looking for anyway, but don't say that it can't be done and then not offer anything helpful, please.

*Sigh*

In principle, you're right. This can take us to stuff like Parker Points or Tier discussion when we try to use a standardized metric to measure some things, but the crux is that this only works out when we artificially design a Point Zero for measurement and only ever work from there. As this is an artificial point that doesn't really relate to what's going on at a specific game table, the discussion on how we rate specific game elements, like classes or spells, can only have value in our artificial framework but doesn't hold any water in comparison to a real game.

[Recherché]

You also have to account for players as well as characters. Does this player have a history of abandoning games with no warning? Do they tend to cause drama? Are they generally someone you consider it fun to play with? The best character in the world is a bad fit if the player is going to be an arse.

[RazorChain]

I don't know what the greatness is that you are looking for so it makes it hard to discuss the metric or what even what or why you are using this metric.


Are these the criteria for the metric?

Personal Traits-
History-
Strengths-
Weaknesses-
Abilities-
Growth/Potential-
Overall Uniqueness-
Personal Motivations-
Likability-
Playability-
Legality-

If so are you going to award points for each catagory or just yes/no/maybe or Fail/pass?

[Haldir]

Sure. Here's helpful: type of game is going to be what the concept is graded against. If I show up with a Paladin-esque character to a Shadowrun game, that character will be a bad fit. A heavy metal vocalist might be fantastic, but they're probably not going to do well as a jazz singer. The entire rubric has to be set against the genre and even specific group to be useful at all. Context is key with subjective judging.

Sure, so if we want characters of other genres, we should look into games that represent those genres. Even if it will be much harder to find people who are proficient in a more obscure game. The rubric should focus on being system-flexible.


You also have to account for players as well as characters. Does this player have a history of abandoning games with no warning? Do they tend to cause drama? Are they generally someone you consider it fun to play with? The best character in the world is a bad fit if the player is going to be an arse.

So, can we roll this into likability in our crude rubric or does it demand its own category? Playability might also cover how the character is handled. But this is something that we'll have to really judge as the characters move through the rounds.


I don't know what the greatness is that you are looking for so it makes it hard to discuss the metric or what even what or why you are using this metric.


Are these the criteria for the metric?

/snip/
If so are you going to award points for each catagory or just yes/no/maybe or Fail/pass?

I would like to have some general levels of progression for each of those categories, which means getting working descriptions for them. A 1-4 or 1-10 scale.

I'm also curious about any further categories people might be interested in seeing. Remember we are looking for heroes. Characters who are fun to watch struggle and fail and succeed. I know it's general, but the most successful characters will be enjoyable throughout all the rounds of the process.

[Haldir]

Here is the first draft of the rubric. Will be updating original post.

Personal Traits-
Basic Character Traits -
Somewhat Developed Traits-
Developed Traits, Some Very Unique-
Purely Unique and Actualized Character

History-
Very common or uninspired backstory
Somewhat Interesting backstory, mostly uninspired
A Good backstory with Interesting Elements
Purely unique and integrated backstory

Strengths-
Characters strengths are very common or generalized
Character strengths are somewhat more developed.
Character strengths are strongly developed and interesting
Strengths are unique and integrated fully into character personality

Weaknesses-
Weaknesses are bland or one dimensional
Character has weaknesses that are marginally thought out
Character weaknesses are developed and interesting
Full integration of character weaknesses into personality and story.

Abilities-
Characters abilities are formulaic or derived strictly from other sources.
Character abilities are beginning to be developed and integrated
Character abilities are well integrated into characters personality
Unique abilities or abilities perfectly reflecting characters personality

Growth/Potential-
Character has no room for growth or challenges
Character has some room to grow and overcome.
Character has taken some steps to identify potential for solving problems
Character has unique and well developed growth opportunities integrated

Personal Motivations-
Characters motivations are not developed well at all, or are very cliche.
Some consideration given to good motivations, but still rather bland.
Character has developed motivations, somewhat integrated into the story
Characters motivations are unique and well integrated into story and personality.

Likability-
Player is not able to convey the fun of their character
Character would be somewhat fun to watch
Character seems like it’d be quite interesting
Character is an absolute blast to watch and always entertains.

Playability-
Character is not well played, doesn’t achieve its basic function
Character is somewhat good at its stated role
Character is well played, but still acts inconsistently
Character is played very consistently, and achieves goals

Legality-
Many violations of the game rules, character relies on incorrect rulings
Violations are present and form large portion of the character
Violations are small and easily fixed.
Rules are followed completely and to the letter