The Averageness of an Average PC

[Drascin]

As I've said, it's not exactly about power level or even importance. Thinking about it really hard, I'd say that it's something like...

How plausible in-setting it would be to roll up a second character who is very similar in general aptitudes and skills, to replace the first one? Like, say, you have an astronaut - how many of those can you afford to lose to various circumstances, narratively, before there's nobody to actually fly Apollo 11? Can you just plausibly excuse the new guy being around the same level of competence and skill? If the answer is "rather easy", then it's a fail by the criteria set here. For instance, it's pretty hard to just replace a dead Solar in Exalted, because there are only 50 in existence, which means that all of them who exist can have enough range in skills that no two of them are alike enough - there very well might not be a second Dawn Solar who focuses on army-slaying, or something.

That's why I mention videogames like MGS and Deus Ex - the point isn't that their protags have special powers, but rather that there is plausibly no one available to replace them quickly or at all in the event of their failure/demise. The US doesn't have another super agent in MGS 1 to send in if Snake messes up, Sarif doesn't have another heavily augmented ex-SWAT professional cop to send on an investigation, etc. Whereas games usually have easy replacements available (and are presumed to work that way), unless the GM outright blocks that from working.

D&D, VtM and Shadowrun fail this test pretty quickly, and with how large WH40k is, I would assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that even things like Deathwatch and Wrath and Glory can have replacements pretty easily. Pendragon might be right with that, since even the extended knighthood is probably less than 150-200 people. Call of Cthulhu also might work, although Lovecraftian horror isn't really what I'm after here (though it's more about general principles).

Exalted is basically the easiest one to roll an extremely similar dude in, actually! You died, your spark went to another guy, you can probably reuse 80-90%% of your character sheet right there if you feel so inclined and you don't even need to make an effort to think up a justification in the slightest

And the thing is that in MGS, you could in fact extremely easily make another character to replace Snake without the slightest narrative hiccup. If we imagine MGS as a tabletop game, it would be significantly easier to justify a replacement character for Snake than explaining, say, why there is another Githzerai Sorcerer to replace your just deceased Githzerai Sorcerer in an average D&D campaign (given the proclivities of the zerai in general). Heck, 2 has a replacement character, with roughly the same mechanical skills! And the implication of more existing! The trick is that he's the guy in place, and there's a clock ticking, so any replacement would be too late.

Which is consistent with how many RPGs work! Very often PCs in games are irreplaceable less through "there is literally no one else in the universe who might be able to do what I'm doing" and more through a combination of uncommon grit and courage (you're Indiana Jones) and being the people who ARE there to actually face the problem (you're the one who knows the Nazis are heading straight for the temple). Sure, there's a very good chance you could find someone to do what Indy does in his movies. But Indy is the man on the spot, so if he doesn't do it, who is going to be there to solve the problem before everything goes pear shaped?

Basically, what I'm trying to get at is that "easy to replace" is... a very moving target, that often depends a lot more on the tone of a game than the ruleset and even far more on the specific campaign than the tone, and that this whole feeling that "well, if a PC can become a wizard by [simple mechanical action X], everyone in the world can do it, so there must be millions of wizards around" is kind of... fallacious, in a way?

[Ignimortis]

*snip*

Like I said, it's less about absolute power, and more about relative power multiplied by it being common or not. You can easily have a game with lots of progression and lots of enemies who are better and bigger than you - it's just that those enemies would probably have to be something either non-sentient or lacking PC potential. Something like D&D, in which there is nobody functionally above level 5 than you - but there are still dragons, chimeras, hydras and other stuff, but perhaps there is but a single NPC archmage and he's really tied up in other stuff. So the implication that the PCs are special needs to be reflected in the implied setting or the general setting for that to work. Not like, say, Faerun, where the captain of the city guard is probably a double-digit level Fighter.

Exalted is basically the easiest one to roll an extremely similar dude in, actually! You died, your spark went to another guy, you can probably reuse 80-90%% of your character sheet right there if you feel so inclined and you don't even need to make an effort to think up a justification in the slightest

And the thing is that in MGS, you could in fact extremely easily make another character to replace Snake without the slightest narrative hiccup. If we imagine MGS as a tabletop game, it would be significantly easier to justify a replacement character for Snake than explaining, say, why there is another Githzerai Sorcerer to replace your just deceased Githzerai Sorcerer in an average D&D campaign (given the proclivities of the zerai in general). Heck, 2 has a replacement character, with roughly the same mechanical skills! And the implication of more existing! The trick is that he's the guy in place, and there's a clock ticking, so any replacement would be too late.

Well, both Snake and Raiden are actually pretty unique for their setting. Solid Snake is a clone of Big Boss, who has been trained to a level of an elite military agent, and has enough experience that actually having a specialist on his level would be unlikely - the games imply that people on that level are, well, Raiden and Frank Jaeger, perhaps, as well as Big Boss. Mooks you meet are presumably elite soldiers but can't really hold a candle to Snake, Meryl is good but also not nearly as good, and Foxhound are all similarly good specialists, but in their own ways - which is the feel I'm actually interested in and which is related to this thread.

Raiden is a child soldier who has an uncanny talent for murder since young age, has been put through a lot and just had his memories locked away by the Patriots - but he's still an insanely talented and experienced individual, not just another soldier who went through something available to most of them (VR training) and that would get him good enough to be compared to Snake.

That's basically the feel I kind of set this thread on - I think that a game about something like Foxhound, a small black ops squad of elites unmatched in their particular expertise among normal humans (but not necessarily in the world itself, which can have monsters and heavy materiel and so on), would really fit the criteria.

Shadowrun actually is pretty close, but the world makes it unfeasible, because the corps always have their a lot of their elite troops who they would spare no expense upon, and who are, by default chargen, simply better than you. It also kinda breaks verisimilitude if you, for some reason, exceed them majorly, because by the logic of the setting, you don't actually have access to anything that they wouldn't have available, unless we're talking something very niche and forbidden like blood magic. Imagine MGS2, but every time you trigger the alarm, you get multiple copies of Vamp, Fortune or Solidus hunting you.

[KineticDiplomat]

I tend to agree that this is a wide ranged based on thematic and mechanical aspects to a system, both in initial set and in opportunity.

With very few exceptions (twilight 2000 is the only one I can think of, and even then you’re at least a soldier - maybe DH or WFRP if you go random chargen), almost all RPGs begin with you being “un-average.” Even in the classic D&D sense, a level one player class represents a special skill set and training - you aren’t a turnip farmer or angry peasant. Not everyone walks around going “oh right, yeah, milked the cow today, also practiced summoning demons or calling on a diety to smite my foes and mend flesh. Same old same old.”

Several games go further to make the point - Shadowrun explicitly says that not only do you have whatever skills let you get in to shadow running, the average PC has survived the brutal winnowing process that claims something like 90% of runners in the first year. So in terms of capability, you’re already the hotness.

Others just focus on the narrative starting once you’re competent enough to do more than kill rats. Blade of the Iron Throne just outright says “yes, you start as Conan or Doc Holliday or whoever because that’s the interesting part of the story.”

Even supposed “zero to hero” games like Blades in The Dark mark you as a cut above of the rest relative to your starting circumstances.

From there, it’s a matter of growth thematics. In lower fantasy style games, growth does not mean becoming night unto a god, so you might become a better action hero who none the less never exceeds the capacity that might just be possible from flesh and blood with a light suspension of disbelief. And generally this is easy to make work, world wise. Because fifteen randos are still dangerous to Bruce Willis.

Higher power fantasy like D&D has a much harder problem. Because you do become increasingly god-like, fifteen randos are about six seconds of both, but supposedly the world has enough challengers to keep throwing appropriate challenges at you a the way to being a demigod.

[Ignimortis]

I tend to agree that this is a wide ranged based on thematic and mechanical aspects to a system, both in initial set and in opportunity.

With very few exceptions (twilight 2000 is the only one I can think of, and even then you’re at least a soldier - maybe DH or WFRP if you go random chargen), almost all RPGs begin with you being “un-average.” Even in the classic D&D sense, a level one player class represents a special skill set and training - you aren’t a turnip farmer or angry peasant. Not everyone walks around going “oh right, yeah, milked the cow today, also practiced summoning demons or calling on a diety to smite my foes and mend flesh. Same old same old.”

Several games go further to make the point - Shadowrun explicitly says that not only do you have whatever skills let you get in to shadow running, the average PC has survived the brutal winnowing process that claims something like 90% of runners in the first year. So in terms of capability, you’re already the hotness.

Others just focus on the narrative starting once you’re competent enough to do more than kill rats. Blade of the Iron Throne just outright says “yes, you start as Conan or Doc Holliday or whoever because that’s the interesting part of the story.”

Even supposed “zero to hero” games like Blades in The Dark mark you as a cut above of the rest relative to your starting circumstances.

From there, it’s a matter of growth thematics. In lower fantasy style games, growth does not mean becoming night unto a god, so you might become a better action hero who none the less never exceeds the capacity that might just be possible from flesh and blood with a light suspension of disbelief. And generally this is easy to make work, world wise. Because fifteen randos are still dangerous to Bruce Willis.

Higher power fantasy like D&D has a much harder problem. Because you do become increasingly god-like, fifteen randos are about six seconds of both, but supposedly the world has enough challengers to keep throwing appropriate challenges at you a the way to being a demigod.

I've mentioned that "average" doesn't mean "average normal person", but an average X, be it an adventurer, a specialist, a shadowrunner, supernatural creature, etc. As in, you're certainly not normal, but the game implies that the pool of people you belong to is large enough to have a lot of people like you, and among those people, you're average. If we take Shadowrun and cyberpunk for example (4e is probably an exception, since it does let you start as a super-elite higher than most elites in the book), then...

You're not Case in Neuromancer, you're his alright no-name partner from a few runs back. You're not Adam Jensen in Deus Ex, you're one of those elite mooks who don't die from a single headshot, but are still present in multiple instances. You're not Major in GitS, you're one of the criminals who are well-prepared and well-armed, like that guy with a camouflage hoodie and a gun firing anti-armor bullets which wreck cars. You're certainly not Raiden in MGR (even without the "throw thousands of tons" part), you're one of those tougher cyborgs with mauls or greatswords which take some effort but are ultimately also mooks.

You're somewhat special, but not exactly protagonist-level. You're probably not the person someone would come to with a mission like those people above get, until you progress further than the game wants you to.

It's the same for D&D, WoD, and most other games I've seen - yes, you're special, but there are many special people, and your "specialness" is pretty low. It makes sense for D&D, really, but in genres where you play a somewhat more niche character than a "fantasy adventurer", it feels...weird. Like, is there really a point to having a "vampire at level 1" in VtM? Someone who cannot reasonably imitate any of the iconic vamps and would probably get dusted by Blade or some more brawny versions of Van Helsing?

[Dimers]

13th Age has a mechanic that can, depending on player choice, make their character absolutely irreplaceable, impossible to replicate. You're literally unique. Whether that uniqueness matters for plot, well, that's up for negotiation between player and GM, but IIRC the book does encourage GMs to make the One Unique Thing shine.

GURPS is highly variable; there's no standard at all for whether you're average compared to other adventurers/superheroes/whatever. Unfortunately it kinda fails the replaceability test, because if one character can spend points for a given power, so can another.

I don't recall Feng Shui well but it might fit the bill. I think it depends mostly on the GM's worldbuilding. There's not a lot of guidance given for how many other beings in the world know what the PCs know.

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

I'm particularly annoyed at White Wolf for filling their books with this crap. There's this special hidden world of superhumans and wonder-workers, and you're one of them -- you should feel like you have some real impact on the world! But no, you're the bottom of the 'special hidden world' heap, every other mage/vampire/werewolf/whatever is more powerful and important than you, and in most cases you can't even make reliable use of the thing which theoretically makes you special. In both mechanics and flavor, the books tell you that you have no real influence.

[Ignimortis]

13th Age has a mechanic that can, depending on player choice, make their character absolutely irreplaceable, impossible to replicate. You're literally unique. Whether that uniqueness matters for plot, well, that's up for negotiation between player and GM, but IIRC the book does encourage GMs to make the One Unique Thing shine.

GURPS is highly variable; there's no standard at all for whether you're average compared to other adventurers/superheroes/whatever. Unfortunately it kinda fails the replaceability test, because if one character can spend points for a given power, so can another.

I don't recall Feng Shui well but it might fit the bill. I think it depends mostly on the GM's worldbuilding. There's not a lot of guidance given for how many other beings in the world know what the PCs know.

Generics which have no set setting are by definition making heroes replaceable, because there's no implied setting - GURPS can give you 100 build points or 400, and that changes the implied setting and tone of the game dramatically. It's like supers games with distinct power levels, where there's no real "default" presented as the most common way to do things. That's completely on the GM, moreso than any games with defined power levels and mechanics around them, and the implied settings thereof.

I'm particularly annoyed at White Wolf for filling their books with this crap. There's this special hidden world of superhumans and wonder-workers, and you're one of them -- you should feel like you have some real impact on the world! But no, you're the bottom of the 'special hidden world' heap, every other mage/vampire/werewolf/whatever is more powerful and important than you, and in most cases you can't even make reliable use of the thing which theoretically makes you special. In both mechanics and flavor, the books tell you that you have no real influence.

Pretty much what I was pointing out, yes. You're a super, but only just, and everyone with a name is probably better than you, until you exceed what the game considers to be normal for PCs. It's pretty fun when you actually get there, but first you gotta live through a year or two of playing a guy with 5 dots in disciplines total and pretty human-like stats.

That's the thing with "you can just start higher up". Sure, it can be solved if everyone agrees to that, but people playing the first time usually don't do that. The first time is usually played pretty much RAW and thus the implied setting matters in these situations.

[Alcore]

How plausible in-setting it would be to roll up a second character who is very similar in general aptitudes and skills, to replace the first one?

hard. Vary hard for most systems.


3.5 assumes straight 10s with NPC arrays for those stronger people and i once rolled 18,16,16,14,14,12 and i have rarely seen anyone beat that. See, you say "roll up" but unless its a PC you don't roll; a DM fills in the blanks for the NPCs. Plenty of systems make you a cut above the rest, sometimes several cuts. I have yet to see a system that requires a DM to roll up the NPCs.


I'm not sure what you are looking for but our help isn't helping. Relative power, how easy to replace. Dungeons and Dragons has it. Most systems has it. I don't know if the gulf between common and uncommon isn't big enough for you or your DM is overpopulating the world with uncommon.

You're somewhat special, but not exactly protagonist-level.

a DM can make a beer bellied, one eyed dim witted sailor a protagonist. Irrelevant.

[Tanarii]

It sounds like what's you're looking for a is a system where you make The Protagonist.

[Ignimortis]

It sounds like what's you're looking for a is a system where you make The Protagonist.

Well, in a way, yes. Maybe if I put it another way...

Most TTRPGs presume you play as an average X (not an average person), be it an adventurer, a specialist, a shadowrunner, supernatural creature, etc. As in, you're certainly not normal, but the game implies that the pool of people you belong to is large enough to have a lot of people like you, and among those people, you're average (or even below average). The default setting and the implied setting usually have that, and I do not argue that a GM cannot change their setting to stop that and make PCs special by default, but that doesn't change the main point, which, I think, has been proven at least somewhat in this thread.

What I'm looking for (not exactly looking for to play, although who knows, but to prove a point of sorts) is a system/setting combo where you can't really be an average X - it's a group small and elite enough that your character is, by default, one of the few humans/whatever playable races who ever get this good. Something like...a superior black ops team. Royal Knights of Kingdom Z (distinct from regular knights who probably number in the hundreds). (In)famous (space?) pirates or enforcers. Something where the game establishes, by default, that you're not a nobody just setting out, not a relative novice, and that there are definitely not hundreds or more people in this field who are at the same level. A few tens, perhaps - that sort of thing works poorly without similar named and established rivals, but not a lot.

I've gotten a few responses that do seem promising and I'll have to look at how those games handle worldbuilding around those conditions.

[MoiMagnus]

What I'm looking for (not exactly looking for to play, although who knows, but to prove a point of sorts) is a system/setting combo where you can't really be an average X - it's a group small and elite enough that your character is, by default, one of the few humans/whatever playable races who ever get this good. Something like...a superior black ops team. Royal Knights of Kingdom Z (distinct from regular knights who probably number in the hundreds). (In)famous (space?) pirates or enforcers. Something where the game establishes, by default, that you're not a nobody just setting out, not a relative novice.

Paranoia High Programmer. That's a "spin-off" of the Paranoia RPG. (And unfortunately quite bad compared to Paranoia, IMO. It's main problem is that to be interesting, you need peoples that already know well enough the Paranoia universe. But even then, the DM has a lot of work to do to maintain an interesting game.)

Quick sum up of the Paranoia universe: in a distant future, humanity's survivors live in the complex Alpha, an underground metropolis under an AI dictatorship from "Our Friend the Computer". The computer is fully parnoiac against the presence of any traitors, any mutant, and any "communist" that lurk in the shadow, and the society is a high tech society of constant betrayal and bureaucratic nightmare. The game is usually played on a parodic tone, where most high-ranking officials and enemies are incompetent and most of the society is fully absurd (The manual heavily encourages the DM to have full autocratic power on the rule of the universe, keeping most of the rules secrets and directly rewarding player behaviour that lead to more interesting games even if that mean ignoring the rules of physics or probability. Yes, that mean a lot of RPG horror stories because not all DMs will make a good use of this power.). But it can also be played as a game of serious blackmail and manipulation in a dystopian universe.

In High Programmer, you play the top of the bureaucratic pyramid, as you are the few that rose to the top, obtaining the right of modifying the code of the Computer (hence essentially enacting laws as it pleases you, as long as no other High Programmer opposes you). You are part of a council of High Programmer that meet to deal with the never ending apocalyptic threat that endanger the Complex Alpha, which is always on the verge of self-destruction or destruction by external factors. (Though your personal gain is still your primary goal, you collaborate with other High Programmer only because the destruction of the Complex Alpha is bad for everyone).

On of the problems of this RPG is that it fails to implement "show, don't tell", as you are managing an economic empire, corrupting lower ranking officials, managing multiple secret societies, sending troups and troubleshooters here and there, but all the gameplay is the group of PCs being around a table for negotiation and giving orders to NPCs, with reports of what is happening. For the most part, it is almost a diplomacy resource management boardgame, except that it doesn't have by default the depth of a good boardgame.

[Theoboldi]

I guess of the games that I've played, Godbound may fit your definition? That system revolves around playing people who can come from any background, but are unique in that they have been granted god-like power that they are free to use however they wish.

The standard setting does have many other beings of similar power, but most of them have specific constraints or have aquired that power through evil means, and the players are generally the only people able (or willing) to fight them. Even beyond that, the standard setting is a mostly very unhappy place, so you're encouraged to use your own powers to make it better.

Even more explicitly, the game has rules for letting the players make quick, vast changes to the game world, which they are actually required to do to level up. So you're not just the only ones who can save and improve the world, you also get to decide how you improve the world and make it stick as part of the mechanics.

[Psyren]

I can't speak to other systems' takes on this, but in D&D at least, just having a PC class makes you pretty exceptional. This is both implied by demographical data (e.g. the DMG population tables) and explicitly stated for systems like Eberron.

This doesn't mean that you'll live up to that potential - you might quit adventuring or die long before then - but you do stand out from average inhabitants of your setting in some way, at least in terms of runway.

[AntiAuthority]

Well, the reason why is probably because it appeals to the fantasy of the Everyman rising up to do great things. That anyone, no matter how unremarkable the circumstances of their background, can rise up and make something out of themselves if they work hard enough and are given the chance to prove themselves. Any faceless person like you or me can matter in the grand scheme of things, even if we're virtually indistinguishable from the waves of faceless masses because we lack overtly supernatural abilities, magic powers, fantastic fighting skills, divine blessings, special destiny or some such that automatically elevates us above 99% of the rest of the population.

The second part is that people might find it hard to relate to the "Chosen One" character that is super special. Most people consuming media or playing TRPGs to emulate that media aren't being told by the universe, "Hey, you have a super special destiny and only you can accomplish it. Nobody else can even hope to accomplish what you're capable of... So get on it!" and has the rest of the world acknowledge that you're on a level beyond them because of how you were born/chosen/mutated/whatever that sets you apart from the faceless masses... I can understand why some people might not be able to put themselves into this person's shoes.

Anyway, I'd say it's a form of wish fulfillment for those who want to start from nothing and a way to relate to your characters as people instead of the Chosen One.

---

To place that sentence and number into context; with today's world population that would make you someone who is absolutely clearly semi-objectively better than every single person in the world except maybe a 100 others. So you take out those 100 in a surprise attack and you've prevented anyone from ever threatening you in a way that makes sense for an RPG and win the game forever?

What would the point of this game be? What is the plot hook? With the exception of some versions of Superman and maybe a few documentaries about presidents and popes I don't think I know any media that have "the protagonist is the most powerful person in the world" as a starting point.

Actually, there's various tropes related to this concept, so there's definitely a market for the protagonist being completely unique because they're the protagonist in-universe.

Though it tends to vary from the hook, as it can be about the super competent protagonist being the only person capable of solving the issues (the Spartan 2s in Halo being worth an army of soldiers by themselves and turning the tide against the Covenant, Samus Aran having the unique weaponry and abilities to save the galaxy, Dante being one of the few able to stand up to the demonic forces because he's a half-devil while regular humans and soldiers are capable of being killed by the weakest demons, etc.) that the majority of the rest of the characters are incapable of handling by themselves, which shows that it takes someone a cut above the usual rank and file to dispatch the enemy... Or it could just be the fun in watching an OP character walk over their enemies (the entirety of the Overlord, Hellsing and One Punch Man anime series, Dante in DMC4)... Or just some that want to see what a protagonist will do with all that power, will they use it to protect others, inflict harm onto others, or something else entirely? That said, there's probably another reason to it that I'm unaware of, but those are the first two that spring to my mind.

[Theoboldi]

So, as an addition to my previous post about Godbound, the author of that system is currently working on a generic fantasy game called Worlds without Number that includes a toned down version of the same mechanics for changing the world.

Even without your PC being some kind of chosen one with great powers, having a clear impact on and place within the campaign world can give that feeling of being unique. It's easy to replace Bork the Barbarian if his main claim to fame is just being a powerful member of the party that defeated the evil lich king. It's much harder to replace Bork if he founded the Blood Axe clan, is the one who abolished slavery in the high kingdom, and became the ambassador between humans and orcs. Just to give an example. Another character can rise to similar heights if Bork dies, but they will have to carve out their own place and cannot be a simple replacement.

[Satinavian]

That's why I mention videogames like MGS and Deus Ex - the point isn't that their protags have special powers, but rather that there is plausibly no one available to replace them quickly or at all in the event of their failure/demise. The US doesn't have another super agent in MGS 1 to send in if Snake messes up, Sarif doesn't have another heavily augmented ex-SWAT professional cop to send on an investigation, etc. Whereas games usually have easy replacements available (and are presumed to work that way), unless the GM outright blocks that from working.

Well that is usually not something that is part of the system, it is something that is part of the module/campaign.

It is actually quite common to have PCs being irreplacable in that sense. Even without accounting for the multitude of plot-devices making a PC a Chosen One.

[Ignimortis]

Paranoia High Programmer. *snip*

That does fit the point of the thread, pretty much. It sounds like the game does run into a common trap of "nothing much fun to do at the top", which is present in many systems that don't really expect you to actually be at the top and have high-level rules tacked on.

I guess of the games that I've played, Godbound may fit your definition? That system revolves around playing people who can come from any background, but are unique in that they have been granted god-like power that they are free to use however they wish.

The standard setting does have many other beings of similar power, but most of them have specific constraints or have aquired that power through evil means, and the players are generally the only people able (or willing) to fight them. Even beyond that, the standard setting is a mostly very unhappy place, so you're encouraged to use your own powers to make it better.

Even more explicitly, the game has rules for letting the players make quick, vast changes to the game world, which they are actually required to do to level up. So you're not just the only ones who can save and improve the world, you also get to decide how you improve the world and make it stick as part of the mechanics.

Oh yeah, I keep hearing about Godbound, although I also keep hearing the word OSR mentioned in conjunction (which is rather off-putting to me). Guess I'll have to grab it for a read myself after all.

I can't speak to other systems' takes on this, but in D&D at least, just having a PC class makes you pretty exceptional. This is both implied by demographical data (e.g. the DMG population tables) and explicitly stated for systems like Eberron.

This doesn't mean that you'll live up to that potential - you might quit adventuring or die long before then - but you do stand out from average inhabitants of your setting in some way, at least in terms of runway.

Like I said (multiple times, I believe!), the exceptional-ness in this case doesn't mean "perfectly common among everyone in the world", but rather "exceptional even among those in similar professions". So D&D adventurers are uncommon, but among those adventurers, who still number in the thousands, you start off as below average.

Well, the reason why is probably because it appeals to the fantasy of the Everyman rising up to do great things. That anyone, no matter how unremarkable the circumstances of their background, can rise up and make something out of themselves if they work hard enough and are given the chance to prove themselves. Any faceless person like you or me can matter in the grand scheme of things, even if we're virtually indistinguishable from the waves of faceless masses because we lack overtly supernatural abilities, magic powers, fantastic fighting skills, divine blessings, special destiny or some such that automatically elevates us above 99% of the rest of the population.

The second part is that people might find it hard to relate to the "Chosen One" character that is super special. Most people consuming media or playing TRPGs to emulate that media aren't being told by the universe, "Hey, you have a super special destiny and only you can accomplish it. Nobody else can even hope to accomplish what you're capable of... So get on it!" and has the rest of the world acknowledge that you're on a level beyond them because of how you were born/chosen/mutated/whatever that sets you apart from the faceless masses... I can understand why some people might not be able to put themselves into this person's shoes.

Anyway, I'd say it's a form of wish fulfillment for those who want to start from nothing and a way to relate to your characters as people instead of the Chosen One.

Yep, and I would say that those things actually work with D&D. What surprises me is more that a lot of systems use that approach, even when the genre suggests that you're playing someone far removed from the average person - you still start off "better than commoners/civilians/most humans, but way worse than any iconic character of the genre was even when their story began", same as D&D, except it doesn't feel as right.

Actually, there's various tropes related to this concept, so there's definitely a market for the protagonist being completely unique because they're the protagonist in-universe.

Precisely. If there was a DMC TTRPG, wouldn't you want to play a half-demon like Dante or at least a quarter-demon like Nero? Sure, you'd probably be weaker than them at their peak, but starting out like Dante in DMC 3 might actually be expected - no DT, but still some crazy anime skills and above peak swordsmanship. It's just that the demons will be numerous, and they don't even hold to human standards anyway. Meanwhile, human hunters in DMC have their appeal, but they aren't the draw here, they're niche.

So, as an addition to my previous post about Godbound, the author of that system is currently working on a generic fantasy game called Worlds without Number that includes a toned down version of the same mechanics for changing the world.

Even without your PC being some kind of chosen one with great powers, having a clear impact on and place within the campaign world can give that feeling of being unique. It's easy to replace Bork the Barbarian if his main claim to fame is just being a powerful member of the party that defeated the evil lich king. It's much harder to replace Bork if he founded the Blood Axe clan, is the one who abolished slavery in the high kingdom, and became the ambassador between humans and orcs. Just to give an example. Another character can rise to similar heights if Bork dies, but they will have to carve out their own place and cannot be a simple replacement.

Also a system I've heard a lot about and never checked out for some reason. I'll have to add it to the list, I like the example you provided if that actually is mechanically supported and not just "well, that's stuff that happened but doesn't affect anything".

Well that is usually not something that is part of the system, it is something that is part of the module/campaign.

It is actually quite common to have PCs being irreplacable in that sense. Even without accounting for the multitude of plot-devices making a PC a Chosen One.

It's kinda a part of both. A game about MGS/DX would have to be a game where the premise itself says that you're one of those rare guys on a mission which really couldn't be trusted to anyone else.

[Theoboldi]

Oh yeah, I keep hearing about Godbound, although I also keep hearing the word OSR mentioned in conjunction (which is rather off-putting to me). Guess I'll have to grab it for a read myself after all.

Also a system I've heard a lot about and never checked out for some reason. I'll have to add it to the list, I like the example you provided if that actually is mechanically supported and not just "well, that's stuff that happened but doesn't affect anything".

I will say, Godbound is definitely OSR in the sense that it is based on 1st edition D&D mechanics and is compatible with most OSR material, but in practise it plays very differently. For one, there's no classes, and you are obviously quite a lot more powerful than average OSR characters, so a lot of stuff related to equipment and wealth gets abstracted. Worlds without Number (which is a fantasy version of the author's sci-fi system, Stars without Number) hews more closely to OSR principles, but is also very much its own thing with lots more character customization and many departures from the usual OSR formula.

That aside, the rules for enacting changes are actually quite interesting in that they are not too heavily tied into the rest of the system. In Worlds without Number, they are even optional! So you can easily bolt those rules onto most other systems and have that work just fine.

Now, the rules only cover the players making those changes and some guidelines for the consequences of them. Making these things matter in the game world does always ultimately come down to the GM. There's no rule that says once your players raised an army, every third adventure or so must revolve around that. However, the rules are quite clear that if your players spend their resources on making something happen, and adventure in pursuit of it, then they will get that thing and it will be a part of the campaign world from then on. Of course, no system can help with making the PCs feel special if the GM is just gonna ignore their achievements and not actually do anything with them.

[Mr Blobby]

The World of Darkness systems place you in a certain category that stand out from the common folk (mages are mortal but with magic, vampires are superhuman but have fatal flaws, werewolves are extremely powerful but might loose control to the beast etc.)...

Though it's perfectly possible for your ST to get you to make 'mundie' characters and then said ST plays a series of quick solo prologues where each of the PC's get their 'special' status [Awakening, Embraced, First Change etc] and literally start on the ground floor. Though for some critters (such as vampires) chances are said character would have been 'above average' on something [which was what temped the sire in the first place].

Yeah, this is a big problem. I am mostly interested in telling proactive stories about changing the world, and most systems have this bulk of "people way higher level than you" in the way of that goal. In D&D, I'd want to start out as a 20th level Lich king, minimum, if not a god; in WoD, I'd want hundreds of not thousands of XP for a "starting" top dog character with seeming world-changing potential...

One problem with this is; learning curve. Unless the player knows the game system and the GM inside-out a character which has grown organically will be 'better made' than one which was built in one sitting.

However, your concern - which I think I'm reading as a basic 'want to be the organ-grinder, not the monkey' and avoid what I call for Vampire the Masquerade the 'deus ex elder' situation - can be dealt with easily by having the PC's start out in smaller sandpit.

Provide the PC's with a small pond - say for VtM a smallish satellite city of a metropolis - where they'll grow in. As it's small, their adversaries will be correspondingly smaller and their abilities to change the environment will be greater. Then, when they're 'big enough', introduce them to the larger pond...

Though there's also the issue of trust and power. If I'm a GM, immediately giving all my players 'world-changing' powers means I've basically promoted them to 'Deputy-GM' in regards to plots, worldbuilding and so on. This means I'll have less power to tell the story[ies]. That is, unless I sneakily shove in a power level above them to counteract...

...The second part is that people might find it hard to relate to the "Chosen One" character that is super special. Most people consuming media or playing TRPGs to emulate that media aren't being told by the universe, "Hey, you have a super special destiny and only you can accomplish it. Nobody else can even hope to accomplish what you're capable of... So get on it!" and has the rest of the world acknowledge that you're on a level beyond them because of how you were born/chosen/mutated/whatever that sets you apart from the faceless masses... I can understand why some people might not be able to put themselves into this person's shoes...

Some players/GMs are also really wary of this trope. As a GM, I'm worried if a player submitted a 'super-special' concept for it's often a sign they're a Mary/Marty Snowflake [though not always!]. And Chosen One stories often - in my opinion - are really poorly written.

[Max_Killjoy]

HERO system (Champion, etc) doesn't assume anything, but the suggested starting points are usually very competent and capable for the setting and campaign being constructed -- there's very little reason to assume that the PCs are "just starting out" unless the group has specifically decided on that setup. There's a reason "street level", "just starting out", and "teen" superheroes have lower starting point totals suggested than for the standard superhero PCs.

[Quertus]

So, earlier, I commented on how PCs could be "irreplaceable" in any system, if they had the right history / status.

Now people are saying that there are systems which explicitly address that… but that a bad GM could still ignore it.

Which leads me to wonder, other than taking it out of the GM's hands¹, giving such things clear, player-facing mechanical benefits, what would "irreplaceably mechanics" even look like?

¹ of the style of "my knight moves for 2&1”, "my Llanowar Elves tap for 1 Green mana", no, we're not playing mother may I.

[Lorsa]

I once ran a solo campaign in nWoD, where the character was a former professional assassin who had lost her memory (so I could run the good old story where you wake up somewhere and don't remember who you are or how you got there). Since WoD is a faux real world, in sheer combat prowess the character was definitely in the top 75 in the entire world (which makes it in the top 99,999999% I believe).

Yet, there was plenty of suspense. Because, as you know, five of the top 90% combat humans can still take out one in the top 99.999999%.

It was a quite fun campaign actually, as the player first thought it was WoD rules but a world without supernaturals. So when the first supernatural stuff appeared he was quite surprised (and it's not often you can surprise jaded long-time roleplayers).

Eventually, the character was working for a "supernatural" department of the FBI. So yes, the foes did end up being more than human. But still, in terms of starting point based on all other humans, the character was definitely high up there.

The fun thing is that the player managed to surprise me in return. There was one time where a case brought the character face-to-face with a demon, and I fully expected it to end in a fight. Instead, the player was worried about his character's love interest, who was also present, and instead decided to talk the demon into working for the FBI unit, hunting down other supernaturals. The player made a good case, and it made great sense for the demon. So all of a sudden the unit had a demon working for them. That, I did not expect.

[Psyren]

Like I said (multiple times, I believe!), the exceptional-ness in this case doesn't mean "perfectly common among everyone in the world", but rather "exceptional even among those in similar professions". So D&D adventurers are uncommon, but among those adventurers, who still number in the thousands, you start off as below average.

I guess my question then is - why are you comparing "just starting off" adventurers to established ones? You're correct that the former group is going to be generally weaker/less capable, but it seems to be a pretty banal observation.

[AntiAuthority]

Yep, and I would say that those things actually work with D&D. What surprises me is more that a lot of systems use that approach, even when the genre suggests that you're playing someone far removed from the average person - you still start off "better than commoners/civilians/most humans, but way worse than any iconic character of the genre was even when their story began", same as D&D, except it doesn't feel as right.

I'm not really that big on the history of TRPGs, but with the none D&D ones... Do you think it might be they're doing this because D&D was one of the first/biggest RPGs, so they copied that aspect too? It's not unusual to copy things from more successful products because you either like those things or you believe they'll help your product's success.

Precisely. If there was a DMC TTRPG, wouldn't you want to play a half-demon like Dante or at least a quarter-demon like Nero? Sure, you'd probably be weaker than them at their peak, but starting out like Dante in DMC 3 might actually be expected - no DT, but still some crazy anime skills and above peak swordsmanship. It's just that the demons will be numerous, and they don't even hold to human standards anyway. Meanwhile, human hunters in DMC have their appeal, but they aren't the draw here, they're niche.

No doubt a half-demon or quarter-demon to pull off crazy sunts. Maybe a human hunter every now and again if I wanted to give myself a challenge.

---

Some players/GMs are also really wary of this trope. As a GM, I'm worried if a player submitted a 'super-special' concept for it's often a sign they're a Mary/Marty Snowflake [though not always!]. And Chosen One stories often - in my opinion - are really poorly written.

Sturgeon's Law in a nutshell.

[Theoboldi]

Something else I think nobody has brought up yet is the prevalence of metaplot in many systems and settings. At the most extreme ends of it you have published adventures where the NPCs are the ones who actually are the main characters, but even D&D 5e's campaigns and adventurer's league modules so far are careful not to heavily disturb the status quo of any one setting so that further adventures can still happen there.

Further than that, most published adventures are deliberately generic enough that any kind of PC can join in on them, often with only very loose restrictions. Adding these two together can easily create the feeling that your PC is nothing special, even if they are performing great heroics.

[Lord Raziere]

See, this is why I define specialness not by what other people think of my character, or whether they have lots of power or prestige...

but by whether they have an interesting concept that I would like to roleplay, regardless of the surrounding world.

I don't do chosen ones. I don't do elite of elites, or what have you. I do anomalies. strange things that award you no prestige, no wealth, nothing....but does give unusual mindsets and powers that make for an interesting to roleplay on its own merits, not for any reward. I have devoted my mind to making sure I can come up with the most interesting concepts while technically remaining within the bounds of the game's rules and setting. those little edge cases that crop up, even if they are no more powerful than any other PC.

I have gotten these PCs into games and have had fun with them. I define their specialness and make them so within the bounds that I am given. such a thing is a matter of creativity, no matter the setting. the setting does not define specialness entirely. It does so only partially, and you have your say in that.

[Mr Blobby]

My objection to Chosen One stories is perhaps more due to the fact they're obvious deux ex machina which can 'solve' any and all plot issues. You don't need to explain logically why the Big Bad is trying to kill the PC - 'for they're the chosen one' and so on.

Now, 'Chosen One' stories can be done well. I'll cite two. One, Harry Potter. I particularly liked when it was finally revealed that Potter became it because Voldemort basically chose him to be [Neville Longbottom also fitting the criteria of the prophecy]. Two: Morrowind. When the PC reaches the 'Cave of the Incarnate' and meets the various ghosts/spirits who tell them that they can be the Nerevarine - if the PC wants to be, that is.

Another aspect not mentioned is perhaps simply bad GMing. If you're playing a bunch of L10 whatevers the characters are perhaps pretty skilled and important when compared to the vast majority of NPCs. Yet... if the GM keeps on throwing L20 [non-combat] NPCs at them, sure the players will start feeling weak. Even more so if the GM is not that good at plot flexibility and keeps on using said NPCs to 'get the PC's back on the rails'.

[Tanarii]

Further than that, most published adventures are deliberately generic enough that any kind of PC can join in on them, often with only very loose restrictions. Adding these two together can easily create the feeling that your PC is nothing special, even if they are performing great heroics.

Performing great heroics / feats is what makes a character special. Not being unique or a chosen one or some other special-to-start.

*grognard grognard*

[Rater202]

I would argue that simply being a PC means that you're special in some way.

Let's take Chronicles of darkness for example, core rules: You're not a mage. You're not a powerful psychic tapping the energy of the Underworld via a symbiotic connection to something that used to be a Ghost but is now closer to an anthropomorphic embodiment of a specific kind of death, you are not a vampire.

You're not even a hunter.

An ordinary average person would not be able to survive an encounter with murderous ghost or maneating ghoul. The core book has rules for advanced martial arts training and God-Damn psychic powers right there, as PC options, that you can take with no special justification beyond "it fits my backstory."

It's assumed that you're the kind of person who can handle an encounter with the supernatural, albeit you're probably in over your head. The game even makes allusions to most people being sheep who ignore and rationalize away the supernatural becuase they can't handle it.

And personally, I like it that way. Roleplaying like this is partly about telling an interesting story and partly about putting yourself in someone else's shoes and pretending to be something you're not.

I'd rather play a heroic warrior bravely facing down monsters, a creepy child who freaks people out becuase they think she's a vampire but she doesn't follow the normal vampire rules and the actual vampires I scared, a tiny techno-organic organism that slowly evolves into a humanlike form as it integrated more technology into itself, a mystic mediating in pursuit of enlightenment, or a transhumanist-biologist than just an average guy with average skills.

I'm an average guy, I think. I'd ****ing die in any of the kinds of story that I like.

[Theoboldi]

Performing great heroics / feats is what makes a character special. Not being unique or a chosen one or some other special-to-start.

*grognard grognard*

That's not what I said though. In fact, my argument is that in many adventures, the accomplishments of the PCs are not treated as anything grand or important.

Sure, you killed Strahd, but he'll return to haunt his domain in a few years because the powers that be want him to suffer. Sure, your PC can rise up from being a peasant farmer to striking down an avatar of Tiamat, but the goddess herself is still alive and her cult will return someday. You save some people now, but your character for all their accomplishments has left no mark on the world, which will continue to be run by the named NPCs and organizations who actually matter.

Though honestly even starting as a special super capable hero is nothing bad. Having to always start out as nobodies as though it makes higher level heroics and in-universe fame more “earned“ is pretty boring. None of us are actually achieving anything real by roleplaying, and starting out as nobodies when you don't want to is just busywork.

[Dimers]

'Chosen One' stories can be done well. I'll cite two. One, Harry Potter. ... Two: Morrowind.

No love for Planescape: Torment? The concept is great and the story believably ties the Chosen One character to all sorts of amazing stuff. I mean, I don't think it'd work great for a tabletop game with multiple players, but that's also true for Harry Potter ... for most books, really.