Creating Characters- Part 1

Character creation is different depending on the game. This is no surprise, character creation should feel different depending on the game. The depth of character creation and the style will take a variety of forms. I think it also explains the homebrewing phenomenon in Dungeons and Dragons and even multiclassing. In order to understand this claim, we need to look at what creating a character is about. If you immediately answer with, “Creating a character,” I recommend you stay awhile and listen.

Dungeons and Dragons character creation ought to be contrasted to another system. Lets look at a system that uses a little bit more to actually define a character: Cypher system. Each character is created by proclaiming that the character is a ________ ________ who ___________. An adjective (charming, graceful, strong, etc.) noun (“class”), and a verb (your power or theme.) This immediately offers a new way of viewing your character. Of course, it is a summation with much more depth, but, at the same time, it is different mold than Dungeons and Dragons. In Dungeons and Dragons, we all make certain assumptions about characters based on their class-- Rogues are sneaky, bards are goofy, barbarians are dumb. Although that may not be true, a system like Cypher system’s does not immediately allow for this kind of assumption. The character sheet immediately gives a glimpse of what sort of character we are looking at by avoiding those class definitions altogether. Although 5e’s archetype system gives us a better look at what sort of character it is, it doesn’t define the character. There is more character information in an adjective more than there is in calling a character a monk in D&D. When you spout the mouthful that is Chaotic Good Noble High-Elf Multiclass Rogue/Bard Swashbuckler-College of the Sword we still know nothing about the character. In fact, we’re only told what their training is, not who they are. 5e’s addition of background has included an easily ignorable and in my opinion fairly bland attempt to create actual characterization. It isn’t a bad inclusion, but I think the character traits are suggested further only encourage the cookie cutter nature of the Dungeons and Dragons. You might say, “Derek, how is it a cookie cutter form of character creation when Cypher system offers you three slots to fill?” One word: Optimization. In Dungeons and Dragons it pays off to play strong classes like Wizard and Rogue. A good number of players don’t pick anything in D&D without considering what it does for them solely on mechanical level. However, I do believe 5e is more balanced than previous iterations, especially 3.5. 

That’s not to say that every player tries to optimize. There are many players, myself included, who try to build characters who are more based on a character concept. I think Cypher System does this better than Dungeons and Dragons does. You want a character that uses magic, but you want it to be light magic? Done. Now what's he or she like? Graceful? Charming? Done. Inside each of these character options are more choices. Dungeons and Dragons offers most of its choices once. At character creation. Spells, and feats don't really apply as these choices do not apply to everyone. At each step of progress, every player at the table is offered choices to make, and depending on the play style or character they want, one Warrior can feel very different from another. Depending on the character, even mage type characters can stand a decent chance of survival in melee. They aren't limited to being just "mages". Ultimately the characters are how the player and GM interpret them.
This isn't to say there is never overlap, but the way I might make a character is different than how you would make a character. 

Regardless, this does not inherently mean that either of these two systems are perfect. Another system with an interesting method of character creation is the Powered by the Apocalypse game, City of Mist from Son of Oak Game Studio. Each character is given tags that describes the character's abilities. For instance, one of your character's tags might be, "Master Swordsman." For any check that involves the character being a "Master Swordsman." You gain a single +1 to your roll. These tags can stack up to a bonus of +3. The only trade off are character related weaknesses. So if your character has a fear of heights, you'll have a penalty on anything related to that weakness. This model truly creates characters, however for players who want more mechanical representation this might feel that this isn't much of a game. It's hard to optimize a character in this system, but the story is key. What is optimal about a story? Nothing. A story is a story, the characters are not optimal people. They may be extraordinary, but they have flaws. City of Mist takes this into consideration and characters are exactly that: Characters. Numbers have less of a hold on this system allowing what is in and out of character to decide. 

Regardless of the system you land on, what defines a character will ultimately differ depending on how the system implements character creation. The in between pieces that the game might not reward are ultimately up to you, but it is nice when the mechanics reflect the identity of the character. As D&D is a perfect model of it, characters in some systems can only be so complex until the system is strained. Take one of my favorite PCs, Akyas for example. In concept he is an assassin/ detective/ spy/ hunter--Essentially he's almost Batman. If you look at how many ways there are to develop a Batman-esque character, that character could be exemplified by any class from the following: Fighter, Rogue, Monk, Ranger. However, there is a major issue with the D&D class model. If a character is a single class character, they will obviously have access to all of the best features of that class. Subclasses, as I have said previously, will help incorporate a theme into that base class, but the more complex a character is, the conventional character building model slips away. Skills help, sure, but when we want favored enemy, sneak attack, evasion, assassinate, extra attack, ambush, whirlwind attack, etc. We're looking at a character design that is a combination of a lot of cool ideas, but are more easily accomplished in 3.5 or pathfinder then in 5e. One might argue that it is because of how new 5e is. To a certain degree, that is true. There are not as many  character options in 5e as there are in 3.5 or pathfinder. At the same time, in both older games, there are more moving parts. Feats are gained at every third level defining character abilities outside classes, and ability scores improve on a separate but slower track. There in lies the role of homebrewing. Homebrewing and hacking your game is risky. I enjoy it as a creator, and I enjoy when players like my work. I personally don't like using my own homebrew classes because I feel like I am getting away with something.

If there a problem with these differences? How do we make up for them? Think it over. When we come back to this theme, we'll look at what defining a character should be and how I as a creator intend to deal with them as I continue developing Chronicle & Tale RPG. 
'Til Next Time, Happy Creating Arcanists!