Some thoughts on game design

[zdashamber]

My ftf group's next campaign will have a tinge of Nobilis to it. I've been thinking about a character, chewing it over in earnest, for more than a week now. And I've gotten a flash of insight into why I love the WoD-style tribe/phase of the moon/whatever groupings, which I believe are described as/in "splatbooks". I mean, I said before that by listing out the options, it gives me an idea of what style and feel the setting and game is meant for. And you can assume that the various options are at least somewhat balanced against each other. And there are zillions of little crystallization points in the descriptions around which a character idea may suddenly precipitate.

But what I really like about characterized systems is that I know what I'm missing. Take Deadlands. I read through the list of Edges and Hindrances, and I know that I could take "Big Ears" or "Grim Servant o' Death", and I can decide whether or not those are things I'm interested in, whether the character I'm thinking of will be able to get by without them. Compare that to Everway,
"What'd you pick as a Fire specialty? I finally went with 'Archery.'"
"Oh, I chose 'Kicks Ass.'"
"'Kicks Ass'? That was an option? Fuck!"
And then for an Air specialty, you could have "Takes Names." Hee hee hee.

It's anarchy. May sound nice to not have bounds, but in practice it's just getting steamrolled by the clever and well-connected. I can't overstate how much I prefer to choose that my character is kinda lacking in the ass-kicking department, instead of suddenly finding it out in the middle of a scene...

I mean, the first time I played Nobilis, I decided to be "Spirit of the West." Stagecoaches, wide-open spaces, the Lone Ranger... Didn't sound too useful, but did sound stylish. But it wasn't a style that mattered in the game. And boundless, it mutated: I granted Fruit an increased bounty in the West (if California even counts) for a year. The hell? I felt bad for merrily steamrolling down the edges of my character concept, but I also would have felt bad if I didn't have anything Fruit wanted and we all had to suffer. Feeling guilty any way you play it? Fuck that shit, sez I.

So now I have to come up with an area of godhood that's wide enough to be useful, useful enough that I can imagine I'd be a part of the action even if I didn't have that special PC glow, but not so widely useful as to be useful all the time, because that's just lame, other people need to be able to shine, too. Oy, sez I.

Comments

[beingfrank.livejournal.com]

This is why I'm becoming more and more of an advocate of collective character design. If the character creation process is done it a group, with people bouncing ideas of each and seeing how they mesh, you start with a greater sense of what's appropriate, what's inappropriate, how things can work together and what shared vision people are going for, than if it all happens individually with players creating characters in isolation, and only the GM acting as go between. Sure, the GM aims to ensure that all the characters fit in the same vision and to communicate that vision to all the players. But the GM is only one person, or point of contact, and much more creative energy comes from a group, potential problems emerge faster and can be solved faster. I'm not sure I want to start any game that doesn't take at least some collaboration as necessary in starting off.

[zdashamber.livejournal.com]

I really agree with you on that... It's a lot more fun, and you can hit the ground running with some connections built in. My ftf group did something similar for the last Amber campaign, New Mutiny (http://wso.williams.edu/~msulliva/campaigns/amber/mutiny/); we built the history as a group, and then the gameplay and character interactions sort of rose from the history. Is was a fun session, the pre-gaming and idea-bouncing, and it helped make sure the tone of the game was good for all. Like, Mike the GM suggested that Fiona had taken Eric's pregnant wife out hunting, and came back with no wife and earrings made from a baby's knucklebones... And I'm like, "Eeeeh... I kinda prefer to be in a game where there's a possibility I could work with anyone, and that's a bit over the line for Fiona..."

Still, though, I prefer a characterized system (with collaborative creation). I don't think terribly well when put on the spot, and so I'm loathe to settle on anything character-wise that I have to clutch out of thin air (even if there are other people around to suggest things), and without a concept I wouldn't get as much from bounces that might change it.