Episode 11 – special snowflakes
The conversation spent a lot of time on the matter of tropes and “uniqueness” of characters. I think there is another useful lens, the idea of parallel play.
Emily Care Boss coined a great term for it, “dollhousing.” Someone comes to the table with an elaborate dollhouse of a back story. Am I supposed to touch it? Rearrange the furniture? Or just look?
Some kinds of gaming behaviors are clear invitations for other players to respond and build on the offer. Orcs attack, what do you do? / My character offers you a drink. / I think your plan is naive and we should spend more time convincing the baroness.
Others feel more like non-invitations: I adjust the blue velvet cloak that I inherited from my father and think wistfully of an NPC you don’t know.
I thought the parallel you drew near the end of the segment was apt: the big back story is a little like the GM’s railroad. Both are chunks of creativity that aren’t meant for others to change and affect, but I’d like you as witnesses while I enjoy it in front of you.
I have found it progressively more difficult to bring an old character into a new game the more intricate I make their backstory. They tend to build up too much narrative momentum in one direction which makes it difficult to adjust when you encounter differences in the game your are playing that make your original idea unworkable. This is more the small details than the big ones because the small ones happen so often.
I find it a lot easier to adapt a base concept than an established character.
“gorgon archer” would be seen as a “special snowflake” by some, but it’s a very simple concept that can go in a lot of different directions, as such it is very easy to adapt to a new campaign.
Meesha Canidae, shifter diviner and merchant whose family was slaughtered while she was completing her apprenticeship has a much more involved storyline with lots of little details that might not work with the campaign you are playing.
To my mind, however, every character should be a unique character who stands out in the world. Even if that uniqueness is being the token everyman in a group of unusual people.
This might be due to the fact I started RPGs with Champions 1st edition where every character is built with an intricate origin and their own unique power set.
I have found it progressively more difficult to bring an old character into a new game the more intricate I make their backstory. They tend to build up too much narrative momentum in one direction which makes it difficult to adjust when you encounter differences in the game your are playing that make your original idea unworkable. This is more the small details than the big ones because the small ones happen so often.
I find it a lot easier to adapt a base concept than an established character.
“gorgon archer” would be seen as a “special snowflake” by some, but it’s a very simple concept that can go in a lot of different directions, as such it is very easy to adapt to a new campaign.
Meesha Canidae, shifter diviner and merchant whose family was slaughtered while she was completing her apprenticeship has a much more involved storyline with lots of little details that might not work with the campaign you are playing.
To my mind, however, every character should be a unique character who stands out in the world. Even if that uniqueness is being the token everyman in a group of unusual people.
This might be due to the fact I started RPGs with Champions 1st edition where every character is built with an intricate origin and their own unique power set.
The same way that in many low prep story games the GM comes to the first session with some ideas for the game but nothing concrete, I feel characters should do the same with their character concepts and back story. The GM and players are building the story together, so why do all that work ahead of time if it might not fit in with what everyone else comes up with. Just because you made it up first doesn’t give it more weight than the other people’s ideas.
The same way that in many low prep story games the GM comes to the first session with some ideas for the game but nothing concrete, I feel characters should do the same with their character concepts and back story. The GM and players are building the story together, so why do all that work ahead of time if it might not fit in with what everyone else comes up with. Just because you made it up first doesn’t give it more weight than the other people’s ideas.
“I adjust the blue velvet cloak that I inherited from my father and think wistfully of an NPC you don’t know.”
Hopefully, this is an invitation too, to delve into something that matters to that character. It invites “You look like you were somewhere else for a moment. Penny (or appropriate coin/item) for your thoughts?” It’s their response to others’ engagement which best determines if it is an invitation or non-invitation.
The best RP happens when both players (or player and GM) are interested in the other person’s character. (Be a fan of their characters). I find it easier to be interested in characters that appear to have depth, feelings and history and let me in to be a part of it, though often not all at once.
“I adjust the blue velvet cloak that I inherited from my father and think wistfully of an NPC you don’t know.”
Hopefully, this is an invitation too, to delve into something that matters to that character. It invites “You look like you were somewhere else for a moment. Penny (or appropriate coin/item) for your thoughts?” It’s their response to others’ engagement which best determines if it is an invitation or non-invitation.
The best RP happens when both players (or player and GM) are interested in the other person’s character. (Be a fan of their characters). I find it easier to be interested in characters that appear to have depth, feelings and history and let me in to be a part of it, though often not all at once.
Interesting thoughts, Michael Prescott. I’ll confess I’m a little foggy on the details of this episode (it was almost 100 episodes ago, haha). In the ensuing years, my personal opinion has probably not shifted too much. I still strongly dislike it when people come to the table with a mountain of backstory. It just doesn’t mesh well with the sort of collaborative play I enjoy. Some of the ideas from this episode were later refined in the GGG episodes of The Gauntlet Podcast and Misdirected Mark.
Interesting thoughts, Michael Prescott. I’ll confess I’m a little foggy on the details of this episode (it was almost 100 episodes ago, haha). In the ensuing years, my personal opinion has probably not shifted too much. I still strongly dislike it when people come to the table with a mountain of backstory. It just doesn’t mesh well with the sort of collaborative play I enjoy. Some of the ideas from this episode were later refined in the GGG episodes of The Gauntlet Podcast and Misdirected Mark.
Jason Cordova I may be doing that to you a lot over the next couple of months as I dredge the archives. 😛
Jason Cordova I may be doing that to you a lot over the next couple of months as I dredge the archives. 😛
Michael Prescott Haha, sounds good. Be advised my opinions of games and the hobby have shifted somewhat over the last few years. If I say something that infuriates you, just give it ten more episodes, haha.
Michael Prescott Haha, sounds good. Be advised my opinions of games and the hobby have shifted somewhat over the last few years. If I say something that infuriates you, just give it ten more episodes, haha.
Just a side note Michael Prescott​, your blog is very cool!
Just a side note Michael Prescott​, your blog is very cool!
Michael G. Barford Thanks!
Michael G. Barford Thanks!