New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 131
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Mr Blobby's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    ...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.
    Some RP'ers like character development when it comes to personality and so on. These are often the ones who if given a 'freeform session' in a town would end up either having a long, rambling chat with another PC in say a bar like a 'bottle episode' in a TV show or go around chatting to NPCs.

    One of the best RP'ing experiences I've had was like this - when several PC's and an NPC's [so a GM-PC] spent the evening in a sports pub. Not only did they get to review the [redacted] they'd been through recently, but also get to know each other better and so on.

    Anyway, if you're having fun, that's the 'achievement'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dimers View Post
    No love for Planescape: Torment?...
    Never encountered it. That and I only needed two examples and those were the first in my head.
    Last edited by Mr Blobby; 2020-05-25 at 06:54 PM.
    My online 'cabinet of curios'; a collection of seemingly random thoughts, experiences, stories and investigations: https://talesfromtheminority.wordpress.com/

    'This is my truth, tell me yours.' - Nye Bevan

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Devil

    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    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.
    Those issues are more on the level of adventure or maybe setting, not system. You can have a D&D world that isn't run by Named NPCs or Big Factions. You can run adventures where the PCs can really change things--not just prevent bad things from happening but actively making good things happen. It's possible for the PCs to be among the characters that matter.

    As to starting as something other than nobodies--there are pleasures to playing at the different power levels (tiers, in 5E-speak). Different kinds of stories, at least. You can see that as "busywork," I suppose, and it might be if you'd rather be playing at higher levels. That's not necessarily the case, though, for every player or every table.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Theoboldi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Blobby View Post
    Some RP'ers like character development when it comes to personality and so on. These are often the ones who if given a 'freeform session' in a town would end up either having a long, rambling chat with another PC in say a bar like a 'bottle episode' in a TV show or go around chatting to NPCs.

    One of the best RP'ing experiences I've had was like this - when several PC's and an NPC's [so a GM-PC] spent the evening in a sports pub. Not only did they get to review the [redacted] they'd been through recently, but also get to know each other better and so on.

    Anyway, if you're having fun, that's the 'achievement'.
    Really? I never heard of this thing called character development! Why, please talk down to me some more. I certainly am convinced by that and am not inclined to just disregard what you say.

    On a more serious note, you can do character development even when your characters start off strong or established in the world. You can even use a session just having PCs converse with each other or with NPCs, with no problems whatsoever. In fact, I encourage that in my games anyways, whether they are high- or low-powered.

    Quote Originally Posted by prabe View Post
    Those issues are more on the level of adventure or maybe setting, not system. You can have a D&D world that isn't run by Named NPCs or Big Factions. You can run adventures where the PCs can really change things--not just prevent bad things from happening but actively making good things happen. It's possible for the PCs to be among the characters that matter.

    As to starting as something other than nobodies--there are pleasures to playing at the different power levels (tiers, in 5E-speak). Different kinds of stories, at least. You can see that as "busywork," I suppose, and it might be if you'd rather be playing at higher levels. That's not necessarily the case, though, for every player or every table.
    I'd argue it's busywork when you don't want to do it. I do agree with you, though, that any given table should start out at the power level they want and that no way is worse than another. Really I just dislike the notion that including the low level gameplay beforehand makes higher level stories more meaningful.

    About your first point, I actually agree fully there. This is a very GM and setting dependent thing. The issue is though, that many adventures are in the sort of style I described, and that can colour the overall behavior of the playerbase if many of them run published adventures.
    Last edited by Theoboldi; 2020-05-25 at 07:08 PM.
    Always look for white text. Always.
    That's how you do it! Have a cookie!
    Quote Originally Posted by ezekielraiden View Post
    You don't win people over by beating them with facts until they surrender; at best all you've got is a conversion under duress, and at worst you've actively made an enemy of your position.

    You don't convince by proving someone wrong. You convince by showing them a better way to be right. The difference may seem subtle or semantic, but I assure you it matters a lot.

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Bohandas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Khedrac View Post
    Games where you really are supposed to be just average:
    • Call of Cthulhu - you just got unlucky enough to discover the eldritch horror.
    • Paranoia - you are just a average security clone.
    • World of Darkness - you are an average non-human preying on the world of humans.
    Actually, in Paranoia you start out as clearance red, which is a position of relative power compared to the rest of the denizens of Alpha Complex
    "If you want to understand biology don't think about vibrant throbbing gels and oozes, think about information technology" -Richard Dawkins

    Omegaupdate Forum

    WoTC Forums Archive + Indexing Projext

    PostImage, a free and sensible alternative to Photobucket

    Temple+ Modding Project for Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil

    Morrus' RPG Forum (EN World v2)

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Devil

    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    Actually, in Paranoia you start out as clearance red, which is a position of relative power compared to the rest of the denizens of Alpha Complex
    It's been a long time since I've read the game, but I think I remember that the general rule is that you failed your way upward from the Infrared unwashed masses to the heights of Red, and you're still being yanked around by those further up the command chain (including the Computer itself). Of course, Paranoia is basically a parody of an RPG, so I'm not sure it works as any sort of example, here.
    Last edited by prabe; 2020-05-25 at 07:28 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #66

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by prabe View Post
    It's been a long time since I've read the game, but I think I remember that the general rule is that you failed your way upward from the Infrared unwashed masses to the heights of Red, and you're still being yanked around by those further up the command chain (including the Computer itself). Of course, Paranoia is basically a parody of an RPG, so I'm not sure it works as any sort of example, here.
    Using Paranoia as a guideline for how RPGs work is kind of like using Spaceballs as a template for a Space Opera.

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    That's not what I said though.
    Correct. I was spring-boarding off your reference to heroics to grognard rant about special snowflake characters. You didn't say anything about them.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Theoboldi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Correct. I was spring-boarding off your reference to heroics to grognard rant about special snowflake characters. You didn't say anything about them.
    Ah, fair enough. I may have been a bit overly guarded, there. I stand by my points overall, though.
    Last edited by Theoboldi; 2020-05-25 at 08:24 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Mr Blobby's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    Really? I never heard of this thing called character development! Why, please talk down to me some more. I certainly am convinced by that and am not inclined to just disregard what you say....
    Well, perhaps if you didn't bemoan the lack of achievement, not making the mark on the world and calling getting the long-term achievements 'busywork' I wouldn't have to 'talk down' to you by pointing out there's more to RP'ing than simple achievement? [which as you rightly point out, isn't even RL achievement].

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    ...On a more serious note, you can do character development even when your characters start off strong or established in the world. You can even use a session just having PCs converse with each other or with NPCs, with no problems whatsoever. In fact, I encourage that in my games anyways, whether they are high- or low-powered...
    Yes, but there's a lot less scope for it. A powerful character has already 'made it' in some form(s). It's perfectly workable, but you've skipped a lot of the PC's development - in this case, their 'salad days'. And some RP'ers have the similar view to the ones who own those big camper vans and go on long road trips; that the journey is as important as the destination.

    But oddly enough, I do in fact agree with you somewhat - starting out so low you're everybody's bitch is a pain and not that fun. An inexperienced / lacklustre / controlling GM can make this even worse; I'm explicitly reminded of a VtM game I once played [not for long] where NPC elders basically controlled everything, the only achievements your character could make were ones which were so small nobody noticed and would get pissy if you tried to 'take the third option' by say, having the PCs try to achieve something out of The City [and away from the elder's hands/eyes].

    But the solution, I feel is to make the low-level game better [which in some cases might mean 'faster advancement'] rather than skipping it entirely. Just like with that VtM game above the solution would have been 'better-played elders' rather than getting the SI to come in and burn them all.
    My online 'cabinet of curios'; a collection of seemingly random thoughts, experiences, stories and investigations: https://talesfromtheminority.wordpress.com/

    'This is my truth, tell me yours.' - Nye Bevan

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    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.
    That sounds awesome! Have any good examples that would be especially relevant to helping the OP with "irreplaceably"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    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*
    I've been waiting for this response - I almost said this myself when I saw the thread, but I figured someone else would express it better.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    That sounds awesome! Have any good examples that would be especially relevant to helping the OP with "irreplaceably"?
    Depends on what settings he wants me to help with. specialness is largely contextual.
    I'm also on discord as "raziere".


  12. - Top - End - #72
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Blobby View Post
    Some RP'ers like character development when it comes to personality and so on. These are often the ones who if given a 'freeform session' in a town would end up either having a long, rambling chat with another PC in say a bar like a 'bottle episode' in a TV show or go around chatting to NPCs.

    One of the best RP'ing experiences I've had was like this - when several PC's and an NPC's [so a GM-PC] spent the evening in a sports pub. Not only did they get to review the [redacted] they'd been through recently, but also get to know each other better and so on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Blobby View Post
    Yes, but there's a lot less scope for it. A powerful character has already 'made it' in some form(s). It's perfectly workable, but you've skipped a lot of the PC's development - in this case, their 'salad days'. And some RP'ers have the similar view to the ones who own those big camper vans and go on long road trips; that the journey is as important as the destination.

    But the solution, I feel is to make the low-level game better [which in some cases might mean 'faster advancement'] rather than skipping it entirely. Just like with that VtM game above the solution would have been 'better-played elders' rather than getting the SI to come in and burn them all.
    So, I'm all about the "in-character chat", but… why do you feel "40 sessions from level 1-10" makes for a "better" character for that chat than "40 sessions from level 15-25"?

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Telok's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    61.2° N, 149.9° W
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by NigelWalmsley View Post
    Using Paranoia as a guideline for how RPGs work is kind of like using Spaceballs as a template for a Space Opera.
    Spaceballs is to 2001: Space Odyssey
    as Paranoia is to Classic Traveller

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Mr Blobby's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    So, I'm all about the "in-character chat", but… why do you feel "40 sessions from level 1-10" makes for a "better" character for that chat than "40 sessions from level 15-25"?
    Short answer: I don't.

    Long answer: The earliest levels will be when the PC is the most green. More likely than not, it's also the steepest part of the learning curve on how their 'world' operates. This often means this would be the most rapid change in the PC's thoughts, goals and so on. Even more so, if you're playing a game where the PCs themselves are ageing.

    I'm not saying the progress should be equal. As I said above, I'm pretty cool with say the first 5 levels of a D&D-type game being run through fairly quickly. My feeling is that the complaint isn't about low-level gaming, but poor low-level gaming.

    Lastly, starting out as a L15 character implies you know the GM and game system fairly well and have already done a decent amount of Blue Booking - kit/spells/backstory/etc beforehand. A L1 character can be made using the 'Quickstart' from the core book, a skim-read of previous and a Blue Book which is nothing more than a list of six items of kit and a 300-word backstory.
    My online 'cabinet of curios'; a collection of seemingly random thoughts, experiences, stories and investigations: https://talesfromtheminority.wordpress.com/

    'This is my truth, tell me yours.' - Nye Bevan

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorsa View Post
    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).
    That's pretty much what I'm looking for - a system that would assume that those things are the default chargen (not necessarily amnesiac, of course), and the stories about them are the default, rather than the endgame. That was pretty much the point of my conversation with the aforementioned friend - we realized that neither of us knows a game where you would play something similar to WoD or Shadowrun, but with the default expectation that the PCs are some sort of recognized in-universe badass, not only mechanically, but narratively, in a sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    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.
    The point is about "why very few systems actually make the characters (by default chargen) anything but people "just starting off". So far the most probable answer would be "it's hard to expect a new player to know enough about the game to make it work properly" as well as "people like humble beginnings being played out".

    Quote Originally Posted by AntiAuthority View Post
    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.
    That very well might be, actually. I've been noticing how older and more well-known RPGs of the 80s and the 90s have tried to distance themselves from D&D, but still used its' tropes and expectations quite often, when not trying to subvert them outright.

    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    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.
    Yes, that's also a major factor! And while that works for D&D (very few people I know actually play D&D in established settings, and every GM I know has at least tried their hand at making something their own, so that they and their plays can own it), it works out less with other games, where the mechanics are tightly interwoven with lore and you can't just port them into another dissimilar setting that would use them easily. You might be onto somethin

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    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.
    See, I do that too. I have made my share of unique characters just using what's in the books, who were one-of-a-kind despite not requiring any changes to the mechanics. That's not really the point of the thread, though - I'm just interested in games which have, by default, a premise of you being that kind of person, an actual one-of-a-kind and not just another merc or adventurer, while avoiding the "if everyone's special, nobody is" pitfall.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    See, I do that too. I have made my share of unique characters just using what's in the books, who were one-of-a-kind despite not requiring any changes to the mechanics. That's not really the point of the thread, though - I'm just interested in games which have, by default, a premise of you being that kind of person, an actual one-of-a-kind and not just another merc or adventurer, while avoiding the "if everyone's special, nobody is" pitfall.
    "just another adventurer"?

    since when were adventurers some rank and file soldier? thats a weird context for special. if the world's full of adventurers, then how haven't they already adventured everywhere? what use are they? to adventure is not just to kill things violently its to explore where other fear to tread full of unknowns and strangeness. if the adventurers are legion then they must be doing that constantly, and to do that constantly well, the map eventually gets filled y'know? and once that happens, whats the use of adventurers? adventurers never struck me as normal. they are like romanticized cowboys or knights, they do a lot of fighting and creating great stories but inevitably end up creating their own doom when the world becomes too orderly and safe for them to be needed anymore.

    and one of a kind what? thats very vague. its easy to create a setting of one of a kinds, they're called superhero settings, they're optimized for it. need to be the last your kind? one dead planet coming right up. don't want to kill all the things in your backstory? okay science experiment gone wrong leading to unrepeatable conditions happened, voila. as for the Syndrome phrase, not even supers have that pitfall as you need normal people to save, so....what is your definition of "everyone is special"?

    again this is really contextual. you've somehow defined "adventurer" as something normal, commonplace and not notable. are you sure your not conflating the OOC commonality of DnD games with IC number of DnD adventurers?
    I'm also on discord as "raziere".


  17. - Top - End - #77
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    That's pretty much what I'm looking for - a system that would assume that those things are the default chargen (not necessarily amnesiac, of course), and the stories about them are the default, rather than the endgame. That was pretty much the point of my conversation with the aforementioned friend - we realized that neither of us knows a game where you would play something similar to WoD or Shadowrun, but with the default expectation that the PCs are some sort of recognized in-universe badass, not only mechanically, but narratively, in a sense.
    I haven't quite explored the thought in length, but I guess part of the reason is that it's easier to scale up than to scale down.

    Since most systems come with a system for character progression built in, anyone running it could easily apply whatever amount of extra progression on to their starting characters if they want to. Very few systems have character regression, so it'd be harder in "you start badass" system to scale down to "average Joe".

    In general, systems typically aim for broadness whenever possible. So if you can choose between "the default is average Joe but there's the possibility for higher power" and "the default is high power", the former might be preferred over the latter.

    I guess what we could fault systems for, is having a default to begin with. Maybe the best is to give examples of build-points and how they relate to various power levels, and then let the group choose which they want to go for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Blue text for sarcasm is an important writing tool. Everybody should use it when they are saying something clearly false.

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Aotrs Commander's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Derby, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    The more mechanically complicated the system is, the less practical it is to start at higher (whether "level" is a discrete measure like in D&D or in a general sense.) While, as DM and inveterate rules-smith, would have few problems starting out with a 20th level character, my teenage niece or my uncle who only plays about four times a year would get overwhelmed much more easily.

    So that's definitely one reason.

    A second is that by its nature, if you design a system that makes the PCs irreplaceable to the world - you have by definition put a stirct limit on how much material you can get out of that world. There's a relavitely finite number of foes to fight, and unless your PCs want to get down to the nitty-gritty of buracracy, that's about it. You can't exactly sell a lot of rulebooks or expansions for something like that, since you have by definition, limited the possibilities. But maybe you don't care that much about that, as a publisher and just want to get out your vision to the world. But after an adventure in those constraints, you can't exactly set another one there after you've killed all the threats and solved all the problems, can you? (And if you do, haven't you invalidated the last party's actions as much as being set in a communal setting where you're not allowed to kill the Whispering Tyrant?)

    So what then? Do you go back to other games, or is now the onus on the DM to continously provide new worlds for every campaign? That's a big ask; and while there are many DMs that might do that, a reliance on that as rules-setting is... Unusual for a good reason, shall we say. Enough that I can't bring to mind any system I'm personally familiar with that didn't have at least one at least "default" setting. GURPS maybe? I've never played it to know enough about it to make that call.

    Which brings me to another reason this paradigm is rare - it makes bad players much harder to reign in, because they have a system-granted-leave to be as big an asshat as they like, without consequence (and treating it as an excuse to play out all their power fantasies). Now, if you're playing a game with your mates, odds are, you at least have some level of getting rid of That One Asshat - but for a system that's published, which might be played at a convention or something? That's a consideration. If the clinet size is small, it's less likely to be a problem, but if this hypothetical system had developed instead of D&D? Imagine all the problem threads we'd be getting. Because this is an idea that's really best suited to players that are going to play it sensibly and not, as mentioned, blanket-permission to be Chaotic Stupid; but the promise of that IS more likely to attract people that want to do that.

    I think those are among the major reasons why this paradigm is not a common one with published rules.



    I will note that it would quite easy in any system to achieve the effect in basically any system either narratively or mechanically; if in D&D, you had an E6 world and then had the PCs at 12th, 15th or 20th or something, that would pretty much have the desired effect or in... I dunno, actually out of the systems I'm personally familiar with, D&D would actually be easiest to do it in (Rolemaster would be pretty much the same as D&D, but Dungeoneer and WFRP are more on a limited curve... I suppose in D6 Star Wars (I used that as a basis for superheros once) you could give the PCs a minimum of, like 8D6 or something in their attributes or something...? It's been ober two decdes since I last played it, so...) So, okay, maybe not that mechanically easily in every system...!

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Theoboldi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Blobby View Post
    Well, perhaps if you didn't bemoan the lack of achievement, not making the mark on the world and calling getting the long-term achievements 'busywork' I wouldn't have to 'talk down' to you by pointing out there's more to RP'ing than simple achievement? [which as you rightly point out, isn't even RL achievement].
    Okay, you are conflating a lot of different things that I wrote there without considering that they are entirely separate points on entirely different issues. I wasn't just giving out a list of qualities that I want in each and every single one of my games, but rather engaging with specific topics that cropped up in this thread and trying to help figure out the answer to the OP's question.

    Also, don't blame me, a complete stranger, for how you decide to behave towards others. That's your decision alone.

    But the solution, I feel is to make the low-level game better [which in some cases might mean 'faster advancement'] rather than skipping it entirely. Just like with that VtM game above the solution would have been 'better-played elders' rather than getting the SI to come in and burn them all.
    I think you're honestly reading a lot into what I wrote that isn't actually there. I like low-level stories just fine. At the same time, I also like high-level stories. And it's quite alright to just want a single type of experience for a given game. It's also alright to want both in order.
    Last edited by Theoboldi; 2020-05-26 at 08:57 AM.
    Always look for white text. Always.
    That's how you do it! Have a cookie!
    Quote Originally Posted by ezekielraiden View Post
    You don't win people over by beating them with facts until they surrender; at best all you've got is a conversion under duress, and at worst you've actively made an enemy of your position.

    You don't convince by proving someone wrong. You convince by showing them a better way to be right. The difference may seem subtle or semantic, but I assure you it matters a lot.

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Aotrs Commander summed up my views on this, but I'd also add - what's wrong with a system that assumes you start at low level, but gives you all the tools you need to start at any level you want? In many systems, you can crowdsource this work out to the players too - tell the group "okay, everyone build your characters, and we're starting at level 10." Have them do all the work of picking things like spells, skills, feats, gear, and writing their backstories to fit the world you're about to use, then do a quick audit of their handiwork sometime before session 1 for any errors, omissions, or recommendations.

    This is not to say that you can't make them feel important/irreplaceable even at level one too if that's what you want. One way to do that might be to make PC classes, or even certain types of PC class (like full casters, or psionic classes, or martial initiators etc.) very rare, and then require the PCs to be those. That's a D&D-centric example but you could probably adapt the principle to other systems too.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    I have been reading this and I just don't understand this thread at all.

    The op keeps using examples of the two 'sides' but those examples are literally the same thing. the OP just is measuring them by different metrics.. ( I think that is a logical fallacy of some sort, but other than No true scotsman i don't remember any names)

    The truth is all the examples he gives of the 'mechanically and narratively unique and special" are 100% as interchangeable as the 'just some guy doing things' examples he gives.

    I think there is a deeper reason as to why, but I am not expert in that particular field.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    For some systems, the lack of clarity about whether the average starting PC is an average person for the setting, or the average above-average person, contributes to other ongoing disputes, perhaps.

    That is, arguments over progression, capabilities, scaling, etc, are partially caused by having an undetermined starting point.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Personally, I think a lot of superhero games have the potential at least to make the PC be someone who is unique and important and special at the beginning of the game.

    For example, with TSR's Marvel Superheroes RPG, characters are made primarily by random chance (as I recall anyway, it's been a long time), so with really good die rolls, you could have a really good character who could be one of the top superheroes around.

    And most games give options to allow one to be more powerful than the suggested power level. For example, Mayfair's DC Heroes RPG suggests that players create a character around the power level of a member of the Teen Titans (450 points) but also allows for PCs to be made on any number of points instead. You could easily have a campaign where all the PCs are on Superman's power level, making the PCs be among the most important characters in the setting.

    But regardless of the actual mechanics, a lot of this comes down to setting rather than game system mechanics. And setting (like all other fluff) is easily changed by the Game Master to fit their desire.

    For example, GURPS lets you play in the world of the Wild Cards novels. In that setting, there are very few truly powerful and influential heroes. A PC could easily be one of the top ten most important characters in the world. Once I ran a game in a setting based on Marvel's New Universe comics in which there were very few superpowered characters and even fewer that were greatly important and influential, so the PCs were incredibly important in the world and capable of changing the entire status quo of the world.


    Unfortunately, most Game Masters are inexperienced novices and therefore they may not know how to suitably challenge a character who is actually important to their universe (they might not even want the PCs to change the status quo of the world), and they may not even realize that sometimes good stories (and games) arise not from "can the hero win" but "what will the hero do in order to win" or even "what will someone with unlimited power actually do with that power" sorts of questions... and with multiple PCs, all of whom have great power but differing viewpoints on how to use that power... things can get very interesting. The PCs can challenge each other... and the GM then has far less work to do than normal to create adventures.

    But, sigh, most GMs are just happy with PCs going down into the sewers to kill one solitary rat after another. This is fun?
    Last edited by SimonMoon6; 2020-05-26 at 11:34 AM.

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    A few recommendations for systems that make you a major player from the start - even if you only use them for ideas.

    Burning Empires: Space Opera that works on the premise that your character is SOMEONE. Maybe the governor of a planet, the lord of a semi-feudal fleet, an aspiring bishop, the head of a corporate research program, whatever. It's mandatory that you start with a few defined friends/allies and rivals appropriate to the level of power. It's less a game about individual kinetic capability - being the best sniper, pilot, space-wizard, whatever - and more about being in a position of power that lets you shape the fate of a planet or system over a story arc. Your characters are firmly in the "great man of history" mold, and not "rando saves the world" mold. Worth a look.

    Blade of The Iron Throne: Low-fantasy with the presumed starting point that you are protagonist worthy material. Advancement is a tertiary aspect of the system, as you are already an Achilles or Cain Blacknife. The understanding is that from the start an individual perfectly competent soldier by is not going to be much of a challenge for you one on one unless you're a wizened researcher or some such. And for combat focused characters, you generally start somewhere between "really very good at this - you would have a good chance of winning a medieval tournament" to "you might not be unto a legend for the ages (yet), but you're definitely one of the best around today." The power level is very low fantasy though, so if single sword wipes chopping down armies is what you're looking for, not so much. As a GM, I cannot tell you how much easier this makes life.

    Song of Swords: I prefer it less to the above, but it does have the rules built in to build in characters ranging from absolutely realistic to the just beyond Homeric hero in a bounded world.

    High-End Splats for many of the WH40k RPGs. (Or Rogue Trader.): Starting point is an assumption that you are both highly personally capable and wield significant power and influence. Yes, there are people higher than you on the totem pole, but you're already playing in rareified airs.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    I'd contest your use of the term average a bit, especially once you start getting into constraining the set arbitrarily until the PCs end up average, but putting that aside: There are absolutely games in which PCs are intentionally unique people in unique situations, a lot of which are explicitly about how people with great power interact with that great power - though how exactly that manifests can vary wildly. Notables:

    Mythender. Here I'd say that concept manifests as "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely". You play people who technically qualify as mortals if you squint hard enough, who are going out to end some myths by murdering their way through a pantheon. The game plays with trying to retain a connection to humanity now that you're isolated by being a godlike being, while simultaneously trying to wield enough power to murder your way through gods. Notably one of the ways characters can die is accidental apotheosis.

    Amber, Nobilis: In these games you play either gods or godlike beings, and you're generally the only god of something. What that something is can vary significantly, but you have a unique interest and perspective regardless (especially in Nobilis), and a character lost is irreplaceable.

    Reign: Who exactly you are can vary, but at the very least you are in a position of leadership. You have followers, they're a substantial component in the game, and that power over people is generally a pervasive thing. The bulk of the people you'll end up in major conflict with also have followers, and the sort of stories that fall out of a Reign game definitely tend to show this effect. There are also several explicit rules relating to the impact of extraordinary people on large group conflict, by which the text clearly means you in particular.

    Follow: Thematically Follow has some similarity to Reign as described, though you're going to see more in the way of community leaders and fewer battle mages and generals. Mechanically they're basically completely different, with Reign being a pretty traditional game in implementation and Follow being an extremely narrative story game.

    Marvel Heroic Roleplay: This is a weird one, mostly because of how licenses work, but by default you pick and play established Marvel characters in a sort of really big troupe play scenario. Part of this is character sheets for a ton of extant characters, including the various world shaking ones.

    As for the other idea that most RPGs are about characters just starting out, that seems dubious. Some form of advancement is common, sure, but the specific zero to hero structure is pretty rare outside D&D. Outside of a handful of generic systems most games are also relatively tightly aimed and some are extremely specific. Some of these are definitely specifically about people just entering their fields, youth and inexperience more generally, and other such things - but plenty are also geared towards established professionals with experience under their belts, big damn heroes who are already a big deal, or people who don't really fit any of that because they're just weird.
    I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.

    I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that.
    -- ChubbyRain

    Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Virtual Austin

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    I don't think it's possible to have an RPG where you aren't "an average X".

    Reason being: if you scrap your character and make another one - it's another X of the same power. And if you scrap that one (or get killed) then you make another character that's also an X of the same power. And heaven forbid if there are multiple players at the table who are also rolling up X's. And if they die or decide to replace their character, you have even more X's.

    This gives you a nigh infinite number of X's at the same power level as you. Making you "an average X".

    ...

    Maybe if you made a game where you could only ever roll up one character and then you burn the game afterward...maybe that would qualify?

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Aotrs Commander's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Derby, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonMoon6 View Post
    The PCs can challenge each other... and the GM then has far less work to do than normal to create adventures.

    But, sigh, most GMs are just happy with PCs going down into the sewers to kill one solitary rat after another. This is fun?
    Having seen the one time (as a player) what happened when the DM actively really wanted that to happen and it having caused the game to completely self-destruct...

    I'll take my rat-hunting over that, if it's all the same to you, thanks. (I mean, I'd prefer a more normal adventure, but between one and t'other...)



    (There were other factors, but that was the major one. Hell, this was despite MY best efforts to keep it together; I sacrificed the only CE charcter I've ever played1 for a LE one (in an Evil party) to explictly try and be a unifiying, not devisive force (bear in mind the group semi-regularly plays Evil parties and this was the only one to have this happen to, so alignment wasn't the problem.)



    1And he was so much fun; his crowning achievement (in a setting that was in a tundra/arcitc reason) that we should overthrow all the governments by changing the world's economy to be based on snow. I fondly remember the reaction of the other players to that suggestion...

    Note that I did my best not to do crap to the other players, and when I was sort of forced into it by having it done by me (and the resultant OoC explosion from one of the players), I immediately spoke to the DM after session and changed character.

    Though I am still mildly peeved that I had to do that it was my character on the recieving end; the other player's (vastly over-powered, since th DM didn't care about LA) succubus stole my magic weapon/thingy (that she knew he was attached to) and she had a blow-up when I said my character got all upset about it; granted, I think I used the words "you have never seen such hate," but, y'know... Roleplaying? Especially as said player seemed to hold us as being a proper roleplayer to our... Hack-and-slashers, shall we politely say. But I resolved the ooc issue, swapped over my character for next session and didn't make any more deal about it. (I think I waved it off at the time as it being "far too easy to get lost in playing a CE character.") The DM, incidently, was a bit miffed, since her really liked my CE guy, but what can you do. Sometimes, you have to literally take one for the team, and sometimes, even that's not enough.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by ngilop View Post
    I have been reading this and I just don't understand this thread at all.

    The op keeps using examples of the two 'sides' but those examples are literally the same thing. the OP just is measuring them by different metrics.. ( I think that is a logical fallacy of some sort, but other than No true scotsman i don't remember any names)

    The truth is all the examples he gives of the 'mechanically and narratively unique and special" are 100% as interchangeable as the 'just some guy doing things' examples he gives.
    Yeah I can't understand it either. I tried, and kept hitting a brick wall.

    I mean, I can understand "not everyone wants to start at level 1" and "not everyone wants to do the hero's journey (or whatever that crap is called)" but the OP seems to reject the idea of starting at higher levels are not being sufficient. Because apparently it's not about power, it's just about being so special and unique you're the only one powerful enough for the job. But apparently that's wrong too.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Theoboldi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    As somebody who is arrogant enough to assume he understands it, I do believe what OP is looking for is a game where the PCs feel properly like the specific protagonists. Not just to the extent that they are the adventurers who happen to be saving this town, or that they are the cyberpunks who happen to be doing this job, but that the overall events of the game only can come about via them.

    I suspect the bit about power only matters in so far as that many RPGs, even the ones where you play powerful beings, start you out as a weak, inexperienced version of those, with plenty of stronger examples around. As such, you still often have that feeling of being a mere pawn and minion in them.

    It's not strictly about power though, I think. Even a grim and low-powered story like the X-Files (which I think was brought up as an example, but I am too lazy to check) has the main characters feel very irreplacable because they are driving the plot through their own curiosity and decisions, informed by their particular personalities and skills. They feel more unique as a result of it.

    Compare that to D&D, where often you are hired to do a specific thing. You are acting on the behalf of someone else, or reacting to a particular evil in progress that threatens everyone, and not you in particular.

    (Do mind I say this as someone who likes D&D, and knows it can be played very differently. I'm just going by rough anecdotal experience and averages here. Ultimately, this is more of a question of setting andan playstyle than system.)

    (There are also other aspects to this, of course, like the usual adherence to the status quo in many settings and modules that I pointed out earlier. But I'd still be here typing tomorrow if I tried to figure all of them out in one post.)
    Last edited by Theoboldi; 2020-05-26 at 05:57 PM.

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Averageness of an Average PC

    Quote Originally Posted by Democratus View Post
    I don't think it's possible to have an RPG where you aren't "an average X".

    Reason being: if you scrap your character and make another one - it's another X of the same power. And if you scrap that one (or get killed) then you make another character that's also an X of the same power. And heaven forbid if there are multiple players at the table who are also rolling up X's. And if they die or decide to replace their character, you have even more X's.

    This gives you a nigh infinite number of X's at the same power level as you. Making you "an average X".

    ...

    Maybe if you made a game where you could only ever roll up one character and then you burn the game afterward...maybe that would qualify?
    It's more about the baked-in/implied setting than the raw ability to make a thousand characters. As in, does the world actually suggest that there are very few PCs not only in proportion to the general populace, but as an absolute number?

    For example, the Exalted example upthread - yes, you can make a new character, because Exaltations don't actually die out, but there are still only 50 or less Solars in Creation at any moment of time, and that's treated as something substantial by the baked-in setting, so there is no possibility (outside of some really weird plot shenanigans) to have an army of a thousand Solars. The only common Exalts who are capable of being mass-produced, the Dragonblooded, are substantially weaker and generally rank a few tiers below Solars...and Solars are designed as default characters/protagonists, so you're not DBs fighting Solars as bosses, you're the Solar fighting DB death squads. As such, you're positioned as someone narratively important not just because you're in the right place at the right time.

    Quote Originally Posted by ngilop View Post
    I have been reading this and I just don't understand this thread at all.
    *snip*
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Yeah I can't understand it either. I tried, and kept hitting a brick wall.
    *snip*
    Quote Originally Posted by Theoboldi View Post
    As somebody who is arrogant enough to assume he understands it, I do believe what OP is looking for is a game where the PCs feel properly like the specific protagonists. Not just to the extent that they are the adventurers who happen to be saving this town, or that they are the cyberpunks who happen to be doing this job, but that the overall events of the game only can come about via them.

    I suspect the bit about power only matters in so far as that many RPGs, even the ones where you play powerful beings, start you out as a weak, inexperienced version of those, with plenty of stronger examples around. As such, you still often have that feeling of being a mere pawn and minion in them.

    It's not strictly about power though, I think. Even a grim and low-powered story like the X-Files (which I think was brought up as an example, but I am too lazy to check) has the main characters feel very irreplaceable because they are driving the plot through their own curiosity and decisions, informed by their particular personalities and skills. They feel more unique as a result of it.

    Compare that to D&D, where often you are hired to do a specific thing. You are acting on the behalf of someone else, or reacting to a particular evil in progress that threatens everyone, and not you in particular.

    (Do mind I say this as someone who likes D&D, and knows it can be played very differently. I'm just going by rough anecdotal experience and averages here. Ultimately, this is more of a question of setting and playstyle than system.)

    (There are also other aspects to this, of course, like the usual adherence to the status quo in many settings and modules that I pointed out earlier. But I'd still be here typing tomorrow if I tried to figure all of them out in one post.)
    Theoboldi has it right in basically everything! It's less about absolute power, more about relative power, and even more about narrative importance of exactly who you are to the plot. The reason I also bring up systems and not only settings is that:
    1. A lot of systems that aren't D&D have their hardwired settings which come with certain assumptions, usually placing you exactly in the "average/below average" category of whoever you're supposed to be playing in the game. However, I (when starting this thread) didn't really know a lot of systems that would come with different assumptions.
    2. Most of the systems I know tend to be designed around that particular "you're still a rookie" playstyle, and end up floundering when you're actually high enough to be notable, because at this point there's usually nothing left to tackle.


    I.e. my main three sources of knowledge are D&D, WoD and Shadowrun (I'm sure most of you have noticed that). D&D and Shadowrun, by default, work on the basis of:
    You're doing a standard adventuring/shadowrunning job, something happens and you get dragged into plot events, but there is no reason that another party with a wildly different background, couldn't be here instead of you, and it is implied that the world actually has quite a few parties like yours, you just happened to be here first. Sometimes nothing even happens and you don't get dragged into anything, you just do your job and get your coin/nuyen.

    Note that D&D has the luxury of having plenty of possible settings that avoid most of what I just listed, and your DM can certainly make your party the only ones around, or at least the only ones that make it over 5th level. Shadowrun doesn't do that, even if you start as Prime Runners or something. You'd have to homebrew something completely different to make that work. Otherwise, there are still corp elites whose entire purpose is to be better than you.

    To clarify - I don't mind having enemies stronger than you. It's just that they, in a game I'm trying to describe, should probably mostly be something that the PC cannot aspire to be - i.e. monsters instead of "basically a PC with more resources to draw on", exceptions being some sort of competing same-power institutions with similarly limited manpower so that they cannot afford to throw mooks at you - anyone numerous enough to be replaced quickly can't really do much to you most of the time, and anyone skilled enough to rival you would also be in such low numbers that losing them is almost unacceptable unless the payoff would be really worth it (great opportunity for personal rivalries and "indirect competition" type of missions, though).

    WoD does things a bit differently - you start as a member of a very special group: vampire, werewolf, mage, etc. Even a new vampire can probably take on something that would be quite possibly deadly to a mortal, and a werewolf is a killing machine by default. However, the world is also full (not literally, but it still feels like it) of other people like you - except they're experienced and more powerful, and generally get to lord you around because of how the setting works. Combine it with lackluster powers of the lower ranks (that's where the power level bit comes in), and you still feel like a nobody, because mortals are still a significant threat for quite a while (multiple opponents really mess you up) and all the other vamps/weres/magi are looking down at you and sending you off on errands.

    And the endgame only works for werewolves - they have their share of supernatural monsters that aren't comparable to PCs and get to break all sorts of rules. What do you do when you're a vampire who has influence in their town and all their Disciplines at 5 to back it up? Nothing much, sit around and play politics, because you can't affect the world on any larger scale personally, unless you do play politics for a few centuries.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •