re: Richard Rogers’ point about Lady Blackbird not having portraits of the characters and therefore allowing for…

re: Richard Rogers’ point about Lady Blackbird not having portraits of the characters and therefore allowing for…

re: Richard Rogers’ point about Lady Blackbird not having portraits of the characters and therefore allowing for wider interpretations (is that a fair paraphrasing?)…

Is having pictorial depictions (and therefore greater prescription) of characters in a game something players would be averse to? Are there games that have tried this approach?

34 thoughts on “re: Richard Rogers’ point about Lady Blackbird not having portraits of the characters and therefore allowing for…”

  1. Games with pregenerated characters avoiding portraits allows for wider interpretations. However for character classes/playbooks I think a portrait gives players a flavour/seed of what that type of character could be like.

  2. Games with pregenerated characters avoiding portraits allows for wider interpretations. However for character classes/playbooks I think a portrait gives players a flavour/seed of what that type of character could be like.

  5. You could split the difference. Night Witches has the option of choosing an image from a whole deck of portraits as well as defining how you think that person is seen on your sheet. That is not all that different from video games that give you somewhere between three and infinite options for appearance.

  6. You could split the difference. Night Witches has the option of choosing an image from a whole deck of portraits as well as defining how you think that person is seen on your sheet. That is not all that different from video games that give you somewhere between three and infinite options for appearance.

  7. I never use the picture on the sheet, because drawing my character is an important part of getting into character for me…but I do like the portraits in the various PbtA games and have noticed that when playing a pbta playbook that doesn’t have one, I am less excited about playing it.

  8. I never use the picture on the sheet, because drawing my character is an important part of getting into character for me…but I do like the portraits in the various PbtA games and have noticed that when playing a pbta playbook that doesn’t have one, I am less excited about playing it.

  9. Having portraits is intrinsically more prescriptive (even if the player ignores it, you’re forcing them to react to the image) — but sometimes you might want to be prescriptive.

  10. Having portraits is intrinsically more prescriptive (even if the player ignores it, you’re forcing them to react to the image) — but sometimes you might want to be prescriptive.

  11. That is true John Alexander! I almost never play anyone that looks remotely like the person on the cover, but if the playbook does not have one then I feel like it is incomplete and less alluring. I guess the difference is that a playbook illustration feels less like a portrait than a style guide? 

  12. That is true John Alexander! I almost never play anyone that looks remotely like the person on the cover, but if the playbook does not have one then I feel like it is incomplete and less alluring. I guess the difference is that a playbook illustration feels less like a portrait than a style guide? 

  13. That’s a neat thought Jason Cox . A style guide. I’ve never thought of it that way, but I think you are totally on the money with that. As Tom McGrenery says, even if you don’t use the image itself, it is something you react to, that feeds your creativity one way or another.

  14. That’s a neat thought Jason Cox . A style guide. I’ve never thought of it that way, but I think you are totally on the money with that. As Tom McGrenery says, even if you don’t use the image itself, it is something you react to, that feeds your creativity one way or another.

  15. I love pictures that are evocative in the game book. I’m not into pictures on the playbook itself. For example the art in Masks is awesome. But I worry that players will feel pigeonholed by the art. At best it’s distracting.

    I think simple art on the playbooks can be less distracting, such as those found in Legend of the Elements playbooks. (e.g. http://legendoftheelements.com/downloads/)

    If anything, I would prefer symbols or iconography, and no actual portraits,

  16. I love pictures that are evocative in the game book. I’m not into pictures on the playbook itself. For example the art in Masks is awesome. But I worry that players will feel pigeonholed by the art. At best it’s distracting.

    I think simple art on the playbooks can be less distracting, such as those found in Legend of the Elements playbooks. (e.g. http://legendoftheelements.com/downloads/)

    If anything, I would prefer symbols or iconography, and no actual portraits,

  17. I love the way that Powers for Good, The Warren, and The Skeletons do it. They have character silhouettes that you choose from that you can then draw your own details on.

  18. I love the way that Powers for Good, The Warren, and The Skeletons do it. They have character silhouettes that you choose from that you can then draw your own details on.

Comments are closed.