At the risk of being somewhat Jesuitical, I’m interested that you mention that character creation can be a way for players to establish long-term character aspirations AND that it is a way of laying the groundwork for ‘emergent’ play and ‘flexibility’. I think we’d all agree that any decent character in a game where choices actually matter will change over time, which makes me wonder why one would bother to spend any time at all thinking about ‘long-term’ anything as an objective or immutable fact about a character. Of course, a character can be created that believes at the time of creation that they want to - I don’t know - haul themselves up from peasant farm boy to knight of the shire (say), or some other ‘progress’ that is ‘long-term’ in the sense that the character imagines it will take a long time. But that’s not quite the same as a player saying that they want their character to achieve the same thing as a ‘meta-fact’ about that character in the campaign. A character can (and should) change (and be changed) through events in play, and that surely has to allow for the possibility of a shift in long-term aspirations. So it seems odd to me to kinda sorta set these things in stone from the get-go. Of course, one may say that the stating of initial goals is just that - a provisional statement. But that seems to sit awkwardly with the premise that this process serves as some sort of touchstone that will inform the campaign as a whole.
This is good stuff, and I welcome any well-thought-out, constructive comments. I like it when players think about their character’s long-term goals. Now, that’s not to say, like you mentioned, that things won’t change in a couple of levels or whatever—but that’s just part of the game. Personally (and I know everyone runs things differently), I find that doing this helps make your character more than just numbers on a sheet. It brings them to life, makes them feel more real. If your character has a long-term goal, and it aligns with the group’s direction, they’ll feel more connected and invested in the journey.
Thank you for taking my comment in the spirit in which it was intended. TTRPG discussions are so often cursed by a lack of charity that one often hesitates to start a discussion.
Yeah. I totally get it. Some of the very best players and GMs I know would agree with you entirely and I have seen for myself just how effective those techniques of ‘filling in details ahead of time’ can be, because they allow for a rounded character to jump off the page right away. I just happen to enjoy the process of ‘emergent character creation’ in part because I like the high-wire act of building from a very narrow base, in part because I think this actually allows me to craft a character over time while only setting those things in aspic that, through play, should be vital or central, and in part because I’m just plain lazy and very often can’t be bothered to think too much about a character in the abstract. Somewhere in my back catalogue I have a post about being ‘a lazy TTRPG player’ which sets out my thoughts at greater length on this question.
Thanks! Also thinking, it kind of saddens me you were hesitant to type a comment or start a discussion for fear of backlash in general. I like feedback and well thought out discussions. Never worry about commenting here my dude. Now onto your article!
At the risk of being somewhat Jesuitical, I’m interested that you mention that character creation can be a way for players to establish long-term character aspirations AND that it is a way of laying the groundwork for ‘emergent’ play and ‘flexibility’. I think we’d all agree that any decent character in a game where choices actually matter will change over time, which makes me wonder why one would bother to spend any time at all thinking about ‘long-term’ anything as an objective or immutable fact about a character. Of course, a character can be created that believes at the time of creation that they want to - I don’t know - haul themselves up from peasant farm boy to knight of the shire (say), or some other ‘progress’ that is ‘long-term’ in the sense that the character imagines it will take a long time. But that’s not quite the same as a player saying that they want their character to achieve the same thing as a ‘meta-fact’ about that character in the campaign. A character can (and should) change (and be changed) through events in play, and that surely has to allow for the possibility of a shift in long-term aspirations. So it seems odd to me to kinda sorta set these things in stone from the get-go. Of course, one may say that the stating of initial goals is just that - a provisional statement. But that seems to sit awkwardly with the premise that this process serves as some sort of touchstone that will inform the campaign as a whole.
This is good stuff, and I welcome any well-thought-out, constructive comments. I like it when players think about their character’s long-term goals. Now, that’s not to say, like you mentioned, that things won’t change in a couple of levels or whatever—but that’s just part of the game. Personally (and I know everyone runs things differently), I find that doing this helps make your character more than just numbers on a sheet. It brings them to life, makes them feel more real. If your character has a long-term goal, and it aligns with the group’s direction, they’ll feel more connected and invested in the journey.
Thank you for taking my comment in the spirit in which it was intended. TTRPG discussions are so often cursed by a lack of charity that one often hesitates to start a discussion.
Yeah. I totally get it. Some of the very best players and GMs I know would agree with you entirely and I have seen for myself just how effective those techniques of ‘filling in details ahead of time’ can be, because they allow for a rounded character to jump off the page right away. I just happen to enjoy the process of ‘emergent character creation’ in part because I like the high-wire act of building from a very narrow base, in part because I think this actually allows me to craft a character over time while only setting those things in aspic that, through play, should be vital or central, and in part because I’m just plain lazy and very often can’t be bothered to think too much about a character in the abstract. Somewhere in my back catalogue I have a post about being ‘a lazy TTRPG player’ which sets out my thoughts at greater length on this question.
Careful what you wish for…. https://open.substack.com/pub/amotleyfool/p/im-a-lazy-ttrpg-player?r=3smyh1&utm_medium=ios
Thanks! Also thinking, it kind of saddens me you were hesitant to type a comment or start a discussion for fear of backlash in general. I like feedback and well thought out discussions. Never worry about commenting here my dude. Now onto your article!
All good here. I’d like to see the lazy TTRPG article