So I have only done this once, years ago, and it worked really well so thought I would share and see if anyone has done similair.
The way it works, start of the first session everyone rolls stats and then writes them down, and is given a blank player sheet then the adventure starts with a description of the surroundings and then I go to player one.
Jeff describe yourself what race are you? At that point players pick a race and name and describe themselves, 2-3 words is all.
Then I might continue the narriative and ask, Sarah, what do you think your profession would be, are you a magic user, a fighter, a healer?
Again I then go through each player asking them really broad questions helping them to decide a class. No choices are made about those classes, no decisions on proficiencies or spells and no stats are written down.
Then I will get each player to decide a background. Now I will stop a second and get players, on their sheet with the numbers written down to simply note down how many languages they have and how many proficiencies. The things that are fixed they note down as well. At this point we can start rolling dice, I might say, we need to unlock a door, who thinks they would be good at that. The player then decides which rolled number to put into dex, and maybe they take proficiency in thieves tools.
and so it goes on, the wizard picks their spells one at a time as the game progresses, the first combat I ask players, do you want to rush in with a sword or shoot with a bow, are you strong or nimble, and slowly during session 1 the players have made a character discovering them as events have unfolded, they might still have question marks, they might need to learn which additional languages they speak, that’s fine the next time they find a dwarven tune or elvish script one player might say, I think my character speaks that, and so another choice is made.
For this one campaign I ran the whole thing like this, so, when players leveled they didn’t have to make choices then and their they could wait until a moment to decide, I will be an assassin, or actually I think I have mage hand.
Not in DnD, but yes, in other games both as a player and GM. I am really ambivalent to it. I like the concept in "theory", but as a player in practice, I have experienced to really not like it. I think that is partly due to my way of creating characters. I don't like to get that question in-game, and then have to answer it really quickly. Some players love it, I feel I have a tendency of ending up creating a character I "don't know" or "understands". And I honestly think that is just because of how we are different when we approach how to create a character. For some what you describe is brilliant and fun, for some (like me) I really want it to be fun (because I like the concept), but I often end up with a character I don't really care about.
But that put aside. If I do a thing like this as a GM, I would usually be quite easy on players who want to change things between sessions. If they come afterwards and says that they really don't like what I "forced" them to decide on the fly in-game, I would let them change it.
Surely that would lead to some strange situations where characters can just claim knowledge, skills or tools to overcome a problem? The first time you come to a locked door, someone claims the skill and magically tools appear in their pack. What armour and weapons are they carrying? How much money do they have? Everytime you hear a new language it just so happens that someone knows it with no prior consideration...
Personally I love creating the character, their backstory, choosing spells and equipment, playing the career path and chooing feats. This is not a quick process. To not have the character in mind and ready to go at the beginning just feels weird. I'm sure you can make it work, but it seems a harder way to do it with a lot more stop/start gameplay while everyone picks during play. People need to figure out how to overcome obstacles not just pick a skill to match as the need arises.
Surely that would lead to some strange situations where characters can just claim knowledge, skills or tools to overcome a problem? The first time you come to a locked door, someone claims the skill and magically tools appear in their pack. What armour and weapons are they carrying? How much money do they have? Everytime you hear a new language it just so happens that someone knows it with no prior consideration...
Personally I love creating the character, their backstory, choosing spells and equipment, playing the career path and chooing feats. This is not a quick process. To not have the character in mind and ready to go at the beginning just feels weird. I'm sure you can make it work, but it seems a harder way to do it with a lot more stop/start gameplay while everyone picks during play. People need to figure out how to overcome obstacles not just pick a skill to match as the need arises.
initially you have to have a suspension of belief and go with it and I will say as a player I also love the same approach as you, background first and then race and class to match, but, as something different it is a really interesting way to form a player, especially with people who have never played the game before and so have no concept of what the attributes are, or which skills to pick. They get to experience things happening around them, it also makes for a really balanced party as people take skills to complement each other.
Not in DnD, but yes, in other games both as a player and GM. I am really ambivalent to it. I like the concept in "theory", but as a player in practice, I have experienced to really not like it. I think that is partly due to my way of creating characters. I don't like to get that question in-game, and then have to answer it really quickly. Some players love it, I feel I have a tendency of ending up creating a character I "don't know" or "understands". And I honestly think that is just because of how we are different when we approach how to create a character. For some what you describe is brilliant and fun, for some (like me) I really want it to be fun (because I like the concept), but I often end up with a character I don't really care about.
But that put aside. If I do a thing like this as a GM, I would usually be quite easy on players who want to change things between sessions. If they come afterwards and says that they really don't like what I "forced" them to decide on the fly in-game, I would let them change it.
I never do it in a forced, tell me now moment, when I have done it it was with people brand new to roleplaying so it allowed me to take time teaching about the attributes and skills with actual examples the party where facing as opposed to just artificially explaining what a nature check is. I also made sure that during that first session every skill and every saving throw was needed at least once. Of course I allow people to tweak between sessions, but then I have always allowed that even with experienced players.
It doesn’t seem like it would work well with experienced players. If I know I want to make a fighter, I probably also know how to answer the questions to get the character I want to play. And at that point, it seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise. It might be good for new players to help them make choices about things they don’t quite understand yet.
So I have only done this once, years ago, and it worked really well so thought I would share and see if anyone has done similair.
The way it works, start of the first session everyone rolls stats and then writes them down, and is given a blank player sheet then the adventure starts with a description of the surroundings and then I go to player one.
Jeff describe yourself what race are you? At that point players pick a race and name and describe themselves, 2-3 words is all.
Then I might continue the narriative and ask, Sarah, what do you think your profession would be, are you a magic user, a fighter, a healer?
Again I then go through each player asking them really broad questions helping them to decide a class. No choices are made about those classes, no decisions on proficiencies or spells and no stats are written down.
Then I will get each player to decide a background. Now I will stop a second and get players, on their sheet with the numbers written down to simply note down how many languages they have and how many proficiencies. The things that are fixed they note down as well. At this point we can start rolling dice, I might say, we need to unlock a door, who thinks they would be good at that. The player then decides which rolled number to put into dex, and maybe they take proficiency in thieves tools.
and so it goes on, the wizard picks their spells one at a time as the game progresses, the first combat I ask players, do you want to rush in with a sword or shoot with a bow, are you strong or nimble, and slowly during session 1 the players have made a character discovering them as events have unfolded, they might still have question marks, they might need to learn which additional languages they speak, that’s fine the next time they find a dwarven tune or elvish script one player might say, I think my character speaks that, and so another choice is made.
For this one campaign I ran the whole thing like this, so, when players leveled they didn’t have to make choices then and their they could wait until a moment to decide, I will be an assassin, or actually I think I have mage hand.
So anyone done anything similair?
Not in DnD, but yes, in other games both as a player and GM. I am really ambivalent to it. I like the concept in "theory", but as a player in practice, I have experienced to really not like it. I think that is partly due to my way of creating characters. I don't like to get that question in-game, and then have to answer it really quickly. Some players love it, I feel I have a tendency of ending up creating a character I "don't know" or "understands". And I honestly think that is just because of how we are different when we approach how to create a character. For some what you describe is brilliant and fun, for some (like me) I really want it to be fun (because I like the concept), but I often end up with a character I don't really care about.
But that put aside. If I do a thing like this as a GM, I would usually be quite easy on players who want to change things between sessions. If they come afterwards and says that they really don't like what I "forced" them to decide on the fly in-game, I would let them change it.
Ludo ergo sum!
Surely that would lead to some strange situations where characters can just claim knowledge, skills or tools to overcome a problem? The first time you come to a locked door, someone claims the skill and magically tools appear in their pack. What armour and weapons are they carrying? How much money do they have? Everytime you hear a new language it just so happens that someone knows it with no prior consideration...
Personally I love creating the character, their backstory, choosing spells and equipment, playing the career path and chooing feats. This is not a quick process. To not have the character in mind and ready to go at the beginning just feels weird. I'm sure you can make it work, but it seems a harder way to do it with a lot more stop/start gameplay while everyone picks during play. People need to figure out how to overcome obstacles not just pick a skill to match as the need arises.
initially you have to have a suspension of belief and go with it and I will say as a player I also love the same approach as you, background first and then race and class to match, but, as something different it is a really interesting way to form a player, especially with people who have never played the game before and so have no concept of what the attributes are, or which skills to pick. They get to experience things happening around them, it also makes for a really balanced party as people take skills to complement each other.
I never do it in a forced, tell me now moment, when I have done it it was with people brand new to roleplaying so it allowed me to take time teaching about the attributes and skills with actual examples the party where facing as opposed to just artificially explaining what a nature check is. I also made sure that during that first session every skill and every saving throw was needed at least once. Of course I allow people to tweak between sessions, but then I have always allowed that even with experienced players.
It doesn’t seem like it would work well with experienced players. If I know I want to make a fighter, I probably also know how to answer the questions to get the character I want to play. And at that point, it seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise.
It might be good for new players to help them make choices about things they don’t quite understand yet.
I would enjoy something like this, as a player.
I think a couple of my players would love it. One would probably hate it.
I probably would not spring this on my players unless they all wanted to do it, but it sounds awesome.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.