Adept Press

Hi!  First post.  I'm still learning The Big Model so I apologize if I'm treading old ground, but I'm here to learn, and want to apply it to my situation.

I've been working on a game on my off and on and have a decent system for creating characters and running combat.  That's all well and good, and the last campaign I ran I had an "oh shit!" moment when I realized that for all the work I did on a setting and a possible story and a sense of characters' motivations, I didn't really know how to move the game along.  And I've been running games for years, but... it had been a long break before this session, and I was rusty, and that impression that "wow, after all of that I still don't know where to start" was strong.

The other issue with that game was a lack of color in just about everything, the spell descriptions, the setting, the characters... it was all too gray for me.

So, this time around, I think I'll leave the combat mechanics and spell mechanics alone, and focus and having a vivid setting and some way to move from scene to scene in a meaningful, engaging, fulfilling way, whatever that really means.

I spent most of my day last Sunday doing research on world building.  I wanted to see what other people recommended.  There's nothing worse than the players not having a clear idea what kinds of things to expect in the world, how people would react to certain behaviors... a general sense of what it's like TO BE THERE. 

And the odd thing is that if you Google world building, or maybe not so odd, most of the advice people recommend has to do with cartography, if as having a map gives players a sense at all what the world feels like.  There was some good material out there, particularly on writers' sites, and that got me thinking.  I could write and write about my stupid little world all day, but would it mean anything once everyone is at the table actually playing the game?  The way I see it, there's three types or targets of world building: (1)  world building so that the author has a better sense of what the world is (2) world building so that a person reading about the world can imagine it when they're reading about it (3) world building so that the people at the table can more easily imagine a similar thing and be on the same page in that shared imaginary space.

So, for world building, for me, that's the real question.  With the aim of everyone at the table having a vivid image in their minds of the game world, what aspects of the world do I focus on, and what aspects am I safe to ignore?  What's the goal of this?  Player's expectations of consequences to actions?  A sense of wonder?  People patting me on the back for creating a rich and wonderful set of PDF's that no one actually reads?  How do I communicate this information to the players?  Talking?   Text?  Maps?  Illustrations?  Bribes?  When do I introduce the setting the players?  Before they create characters?  After?  How about during and as a function of the character building process itself?  How would I do that?

And it seems to me that the word "evocative" might be helpful.  It seems to me, just on a hunch, that I shouldn't have to descriptive every particle in the game world for people to have a sense what it looks like, what it feels like.  For instance, I've never read any of the Dresden Files books, but I picked up a copy of the Dresden Files RPG.  I read the first paragraph and already knew what the world is like:  exactly like ours, except magic is real, but sort of different, and us mortals are sort of bumbling along while some seriously odd shit is happening right under our noses.

And then there's scene framing.  Who cares if everyone at the table has the most wonderful shared vision of my imaginary world if no one knows what to do with it?  How can I make the process of scene framing deepen the players' feeling of the world?

This isn't a theoretical question.  In my last campaign I had all these great ideas about factions and what it's like to be a Mage who practices openly versus in secret, but the only way I knew how to get the game rolling sort of lead to a completely different tone for the adventure, and we ended up chasing down a mutant-spawning, mustache-twirling villain.  It was fun, but I wasn't able to get the players to engage the setting and choose their own goals and methods.  (Or maybe I'm a terrible Narrator.)  Plus there were a lot of stupid scenes, particularly regarding traveling, that had to be included for the sake of.... shit... is this an example of Simulationist By Habit?  Hmm, I bet it is.

There has to be a structure for that somewhere out there, but I don't know it.  A way to connect setting and situation and character so that they all enrich one another.  A way to build forward momentum to the shared narrative.

So I'm looking for advice here on games to check out and games to play, because it must be obvious that I live in a gaming bubble.  I'm also curious which questions I've asked have been answered on these forums, and which are still up in the air.  I'd like to know where it's my thinking that's leading my session to come up short.

I hope this is an interesting question and that you get a sense of what I'm looking for.  It's hard to ask because, I'm not sure I'll know what I'm looking for until I find it.  It's just a sense of a beautiful game flowing with active participation from all of the players, tumbling forward like a great book, with no one really knowing what's going to happen next, but somehow creating a coherent, exciting, and interesting story. 
Is this even possible?

I remember it feeling it in my earlier role playing experiences.  There was a sense of fun and adventure and possibility.  Maybe it was because I was a kid.  I don't know.  We told stories, and it was fun.

Hi, and welcome! First stop: have you seen my essay Setting and emergent stories (http://adept-press.com/wordpress/wp-content/media/setting_dissection.pdf)? I think it's relevant and might help.

It so happens I'm also working up an essay critiquing the term "sandbox" which is sure to win me many friends and accolades, possibly groupies. Given your questions and points, it should be helpful too, or so I hope.

You may have figured this out already, but as I see it, no role-playing ever takes place in a setting, and the characters don't move around in one. Instead, all we ever see or experience in role-playing, is Situation. To make Situation work, you have to conceive of a setting for it to be in, but even the minimum works beautifully for that: one micron thick, or even abstractly, a couple of key concepts we associate with or pretend is "all about," above the scale of our Situation.

And that's all it has to be, if we are talking about minimal necessity. As I wrote in Sorcerer & Sword, the great sword-and-sorcery pulp fantasy authors actually were not setting-oriented world-builders, but each more or less inadvertently constructed one with the bricks of story by story invention - they needed cool places for their characters to be in, so story by story, you get a list of cool places and a vague sense of their orientation toward one another. Typically fans make the map, not the author (or if they do it's really crude like Howard's Hyborian Age), and typically the author writes a "setting summary" passage like the ones I quote in that supplement long after the stories have already become a saga. Another point is that few of these saga were written as such from the start, but rather get reassembled into one after the author finds that he or she likes writing about this character.

Is it possible to be more setting-first? Yes - but never never to the point of being more that a facilitator of Situation. Maybe a much more powerful and qualitatively different facilitator than my micron-thick description above, but only a facilitator. The essay I linked to is about how that's done. Let me know what you think of it.

Best, Ron

Hi Ron!  Thanks for responding to quickly.  I had a family event yesterday so here I am today getting back to you.

As it turns out I read "Setting And Emergent Stories" last week while I was at work, but I needed to reread it before responding since my work environment wasn't ideal for absorbing new information.

Thank you for clarifying the fact that the Situation is what all we ever experience at the table.  And it seems to me that, perhaps, moving from situation to situation is the essence of role playing, and setting, character, location, and system all have a role to play in that process.

For now, I'm going to imagine Setting as the deck in a game of cards, and Situation as the table that game is played on.  Setting represents everything that could possibly be on the table, and situation represents everything that actually is.

Generally, the procedures you describe in Part 2 section 2 sound great, but it's all very abstract and up in the air.  Even with the example you gave from DeGenesis it's hard to imagine doing it in another game.  It's hard to know if the conflicts imbedded in how characters relate to the setting are actually going to be enough to get the game to tumble forward.

At a certain point it just seems that there's no substitute for playing with people who are brimming with imagination, and being such a person yourself.

I suppose I could test my basic setting description by organizing sessions simply built around choosing a location and constructing character identities.  If I find that players are inspired then I'll know my material is working.  Otherwise, I'll know my material is not working.

Now, if the characters are made and their various connections to the setting are fleshed out, and players are having a hard time coming up with kickers, then I'll know that my mechanics for connecting characters to setting aren't working.

And if the characters have an easy time coming up with great kickers, but I'm having a hard time coming up with the first scene, I'll know there is something not quite working with my scene framing mechanics.

And if I pull off the first scene but we have a hard time framing subsequent scenes, then I'll know my rules-driven consequences for how resolved conflicts set up subsequent scenes are not working.

And while I'm looking for solutions to problems, would you say I could turn to HeroQuest/RuneQuest (particularly the Haunted Ruins supplement), Everway, and Trollbabe as games with mechanics that I could model for my own game on?

And regarding mechanics, let me ask:  does the ability to inspire the players and capture the imagination have to do with this?  Does some of it have to do with getting the players to consider specific questions, getting them to focus their imaginations on specific things?

And my last question has to do with theme.  Your definition:  "Theme:  the point, message, or key emotional conclusion perceived by an audience member about a fictional series of events.  The presence of a theme is the defining feature of Story as opposed to transcript."

So is basically theme whatever makes a setting interesting and unique and with a vivid emotional flavor?

Hi! My apologies for delaying so long in getting to this. D&D discussions are a sucking vortex.

First, "moving from situation to situation" – absolutely yes. Add to it quanta or phases of change in a character, and you have the operative dynamics of play all laid out for you. All game mechanics are subroutines of these two phenomena.

Second, let's go ahead and try my DeGenesis method with any appropriate game of your choice. Pick one! We'll do it right here; I'll ask various questions and you'll answer.

Now I'm going to pull out a couple of your phrases and make some points about the underlying problem I think I see.

QuoteIt's hard to know if the conflicts imbedded in how characters relate to the setting are actually going to be enough to get the game to tumble forward.

...   If I find that players are inspired then I'll know my material is working.  Otherwise, I'll know my material is not working.

... does the ability to inspire the players and capture the imagination have to do with this?  Does some of it have to do with getting the players to consider specific questions, getting them to focus their imaginations on specific things?

But take a look at the text I bolded – do you see the problem? It is that you may be trapped in the transitive model of play-enjoyment: that the GM is full of enthusiasm and appreciation for the material, and he or she is faced with a group of cooperative, but basically infantile players. They need to be inspired. They need to be motivated. They need to be engaged (as targets of a transitive verb). They need a den daddy and creative leader. They ...

... I'm getting disgusted, basically. How about turning this around? How about, from the get-go, assuming that the players are more motivated, more inspired, and more engaged than you are? How about even the idea that, in practice, they may know better what the potential of this setting material is?

Most of the points you made in the text I pulled those phrases from is fine in concept, but it's way too oriented toward "not working" and generally more about damage control than about doing anything. You seem to be seeing the non-inspired, non-engaged player as the default – why?

QuoteSo is basically theme whatever makes a setting interesting and unique and with a vivid emotional flavor?

Nope. That's Color. Theme is an emergent feature which will and must be present insofar as fictional, character-relevant conflicts are brought to emotionally satisfying conclusions. You don't need to make it happen or "put in" a theme. In fact, the more you try, the more you interfere with its production.

Doing this one out of order:

QuoteAnd while I'm looking for solutions to problems, would you say I could turn to HeroQuest/RuneQuest (particularly the Haunted Ruins supplement), Everway, and Trollbabe as games with mechanics that I could model for my own game on?

You won't find relevant mechanics in the RuneQuest material. HeroQuest, sure, but it's not brought forward too well in the text, at least not in the version of the game I have. Maybe in the later ones. Everway, only in a mash-up way, and possibly misleadingly – the game is written too much from the perspective I criticized above, that players are basically thespians being moved about by a GM. Trollbabe, yes, but "setting" in Trollbabe is a micron-thick thing, which becomes built primarily through play in exactly the same way as Sorcerer & Sword (and Apocalypse World). It's not the kind of setting-punch you were asking about or discussed in my essay.

Furthermore, again, I think your search for mechanics is too much about a tool to "fix" players who "don't get it." We need to get away from that.

Tell me: what textual RPG setting really turns you on?

Best, Ron

You're right.  I'm imagining the wrong players.  I'm usually pretty self-aware, but not on this one.  Even though I said "At a certain point it just seems that there's no substitute for playing with people who are brimming with imagination, and being such a person yourself" I didn't realize how much my assumption that I'd be dealing with only unimaginative players had permeated my thinking about game design.

Well done.  For the reminder of the thought experiment I'll imagine great players. 

Re: theme.  I was mistaken that Theme was supposed to be part in parcel in the setting, rather than emergent.  From my experience with music... I'll see my least favorite thing is when an artist is trying to hit you over the head with his or her meaning, rather than simply holding a mirror for you to look at, and letting you find meaning for yourself.

I love the Wheel of Time.  Is this a good example?

I curse the fact that "theme" has more than one important meaning, one of which is its use in music, pretty much synonymous with "motif," and one of which is associated with narrative media and is routinely butchered by Mrs. McGillicuddy in primary education and hordes of graduate TAs in college Lit 101 courses. (No offense to anyone reading who has been such a TA. I forgive you, mostly.)

So, World of Time, using the D20 game, right? Sure. In 100 words or less, can you describe why the setting qualifies? Don't sell me on it, or try to convince me of anything. I believe you, so consider me a sympathetic listener. Furthermore, let's take it as given that as a setting, it's consistent, complete, fleshed-out, internally justified, and all that other 'whatever' the world-builders seem to care about. I'm interested in how it's an exciting setting.

I only know the settings from the novels, not the game, and assuming I know what you mean by "qualifies", here goes:

The Innkeeper's a Darkfriend, or an informer for the Children of the Light, or both.  Those rats are spies too.  And you're lucky while traveling down the road if you don't get impressed into the Seachan Army, or ambushed by Shiel scouts. 

If you're a male channeler, you're screwed, because the taint is going to drive your insane if the Red Aes Sedai don't get you first.

If you're a wolf-kin, Slayer will kill you.  If you're an Ogier everyone will try to use you.

And Trollocs, and grey man, and Myddraal.

And if you see Forsaken, just run.

Hi Jared,

"Fudge"  (if you've seen A Christmas Story), I was hoping for a bona fide RPG setting ... oh well, let's not back-track and let's pretend we both have the D20 game in front of us. What really matters on your side of the screen is that you have a geographical and cultural context for the stuff you wrote about.

So ... here I am, reading your summary, and I say, "Cool! I want to play a guy dealing with this stuff." Because what I see is the notion that every designated side in the setting's conflicts carries costs which I might not want to bear, and that danger looms everywhere. So there's too much badness around to go it alone, and yet "belonging" to a group is a whole world of problems.

Assuming that when I make that statement, you say, "Yeah, you got it!", the next step is for you to designate a spot on the map where our first scenes will occur. Tell me where (use a link to an image if you can), tell me about what sort of people live there and who else would conceivably be there - races, professionals, named groups, and similar. When I say "conceivably" though, I do not mean "could" at the very stretchiest limits of possibility, but rather very reliably and likely to be there.

What I'm looking for is a distinctive and preferably significantly limited subset of all the character diversity the whole setting has to offer.

Also, in that spot, what sort of threatening circumstances are evident, if any? I don't mean to the knowledgeable reader with a big setting overview, but from the point of view of the characters who are there.

Best, Ron

Maps:  http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Ebou_Dar?file=Edoudarmap.png

http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Ebou_Dar?file=Ebou_Dar_Altara.png

I'll be quoting from the Wheel of Time wiki here and there.

"Ebou Dar is the capital city of Altara, located on the southern coast, straddling the River Eldar. The city is built around a large bay, with the river dividing it in two. One side contains the palaces, homes, and shops of the upper and middle classes, the other, known as the Rahad, is home of the lower classes in the Ebou Dar society."

"The streets in the Rahad are often narrow alleys, with buildings standing as high as five or six stories above the ground. The streets are filled with the refuse of the inhabitants. The Rahad is no doubt a very dangerous place. Not only are duels very frequent, some adversaries do not even bother with the formalities and simply stab their victims in the back."

Recently the Seachan (not to be confused with 4chan) have conquered the city, almost without a fight.  They are using the city as a base of operations to push into the interior and to the east.  The local nobles have officially sworn fealty to the Seanchan, and begun handing over Aes Sedai to be made into Damane (slave channelers.)  Some nobles are secretly plotting against the Seanchan, but are far to weak to move openly.

The Kin "is a group of female channelers who help runaways from the White Tower."  Although not very strong in use of the One Power they are very long lived, nominally allied to the ideals of the White Tower, and adept at conducting their affairs secretly.  "The thirteen oldest members in Ebou Dar comprise the Knitting Circle and are the ruling body of the Kin."

Aes Sedai:  Despite the Seanchan occupation there are still Aes Sedai in Ebou Dar.  They must, however, keep their identities secret or risk being enslaved.  Aes Sedai are very interested in restoring some kind of relationship with The Kin.

Darkfriends: The high Lady Suroth, in charge of Seanchan forces in Ebou Dar, is in fact a Darkfriend, taking order from the Forsaken  Semirhage.  Many well-placed Seanchan nobles and military figures are also themselves Seanchan.

Hunters of the Horn:  Wherever there is danger or intrigue, there will be Hunters of the Horn stirring up trouble.  Although nominally committed to founding the lost Horn of Valerie (which ironically has already been found) their mostly committed to drinking and fighting in taverns.

Ashaman:  Rand al'thor's Ashaman can Travel anywhere they please.  With trouble brewing, they can be expected to be found in Ebou Dar on Rand's orders, or, for that matter, Mazrim Taim's orders, himself, a Darkfriend.

Riff raff:  The Rahad is swarming with lowlife of every conceivable variety:  brawlers, fighters, assassins, hit-men and petty hoods.  Crooks, thieves, robbers, drunks, drinkers, and booze hounds. 

Professions:  Merchants, sailors, dock workers, smugglers, Seanchan nobility, Ebou Dari nobility, solddiers, trademen, Aes Sedai, herbal healers, criminals of every stripe.

Long Term Threats:  Anyone who can channel risks being enslaved by the Seanchan.  The Seanchan are looking north towards Altara, hoping to extend their reach.  They are eagerly buying up all war material and foodstuffs, which, though good for trade, is empoverishing the lower classes, who are forced to enlist to feed their families.  The only thing in their way are the forces of Rand al'Thor, which can be summoned anywhere in the world via the making of Gateways.  Sometimes crossfires between Rand al'Thor and the Seanchan happen within the city walls.  Within the Seanchan hierarchy there is a constant vigilance against Darkfriends, but it appears the Dark Lord has successfully co-opted their leadership.  An entire war of intrigue is being waged as honest Seanchan attempt to root out the Dark Friends in their midst.  The lower classes so far are happy to see their former rulers deposed, but this peace may not last when the Seanchan begin impressing their populace into service.  The local merchants were initially displeased at the destruction of their shipping, but the Seanchan bring order to the entire West Coast, as well as many mouths to feed, so trade looks good as long as Ebou Dar remains free of the fighting, although the new taxes and tariffs can be suffocating.  Since the Seanchan outlawed Aes Sedai, there is now a thriving trade in smuggling channelers out of (and sometimes into) the city, as well as in immense black market was iron, cloth, lacquer and other implements are war.  As always, the Dark Lord seems able to send his spies and assassins anywhere he pleases.  Beware of gray men, Gholam, Draghkar lurking in the hidden dark areas of the the Rahad, or his palace chambers, for that matter.

OK! I wanna play a riffraff person. Who ... um, can Channel, but is also socially pretty prominent in riffraff terms, a power player among the refuse-ridden, dagger-in-the-dark economy of the Rahad. So he is perfectly OK with the new rulership, as long as they don't enslave him - might even have the clout to make himself useful without being enslaved.

Can I do that? Does this sound like a fun person to play? What am I missing or not understanding - the character concept is currently open enough in my mind that I can tweak it any which way to fit better.

Best, Ron

It's critical to know if the character is male or female.  The male half of the Power has been tainted by the Dark One, but has recently been cleaned.  If your character has been channeling since before the cleansing of saidin, he may be partially insane in some way, and his madness may have taken on a life of it's own, or he may be feel.  If he began channeling since the cleansing, he's not that experienced, and might run the kill of himself when he channels.  Either way, the stigma against male channelers remains, and those who are not in the employ of Rand al'Thor are usually considered public enemy #1 - death on sight, that kind of thing.

Also, did he learn to channel on his own, or was he taught?  If he learned on his own his growth would be somewhat stunted and his use of the Power somewhat crude.  If he was taught, it was most likely at the Black Tower, where Rand al'Thor's Ashaman are trained.  Your character could possibly be a runaway Ashaman, or an Ashaman agent sent back to his native city.  If he was taught by anyone else, it was most likely a Forsaken, who work directly for the Dark Lord, and that would complicate your character's life a lot.  Of course, many of the Forsaken have been wiped out by al'Thor, so possibly your former master is no longer alive.

A character like this would be a lot of fun to play, since he'd be able to play just about every side against the other;  Light against Dark, Seanchan versus Westlanders, Aes Sedai versus Ashaman, high class versus low class.

The question is, what does your character stand for or believe in?  Is he willing to sell everything that's not tied down, or does he believe in something?

OK... what questions should I be asking you to help the character creation process?

I like the idea that the Rahad isn't actually under anyone's true control. So if my guy is a real power-player in the underworld there, then even being a recent Channeler means he (male) isn't going to be easily nabbed by anyone who thinks they can. He might even keep the ability very secret and use it as little as possible. I don't see him as trained or as an agent of anyone. I mean, you say, "public enemy #1," but this is the Rahad - bring it on, asshole, these alleys are ours. Send your little "agents" in if you dare.

We need to process what I did just there. Your post acknowledges that I have found a "crux point" in the power structure of the city you've described, a situation/location which does not immediately lend itself to instant domination by any of the canonical power players. I've responded to that acknowledgment by turning up the challenge for those power players.

QuoteThe question is, what does your character stand for or believe in?  Is he willing to sell everything that's not tied down, or does he believe in something?

Exactly. And it's crucial that character creation does not answer that question. If I did, then there'd be no point to playing the character.

The character is conceived from the conflicts of the setting. That's why this setting is more to us than merely a "skin" for exercising the various combat and magic subroutines of the system.

What do you think it would be like to be sitting with four or five other people, all of whom just did what I did with your brief summary of the immediate setting, in different ways?

Is this different from your previous experiences in role-playing, or similar?

Also, note that I worked with absolutely nothing except what you gave me. I didn't click on the links (yet). I haven't read the books (well, I read the first hundred pages of the first book, once). And yet, without knowing the setting, I'm honoring the setting as you see it, in how I built the character.

That's why setting-centric play is only infrequently done well. It has nothing to do with educating me about the scope and details of the whole setting. It has everything to do with outlining the crisis and power-tensions as they are manifested in a single spot. If we do that, then you can bet that I will in fact, later, click those links and become a student of the setting myself, session by session, without any need for you to be the mentor or contact point for it. And yet, it does have everything to do with liking what the setting has to offer us in terms of conditions at that single spot, and therefore is unique to that setting.

Let me know where you stand with these ideas. We'll talk about systemic effects and issues after that.

Best, Ron

I see what you did there.  But what if a player chooses the least conflict-prone character imaginable within the setting?  How can I make that exciting?  Is that what the question "Does this sound like a fun character to play" is for?  Or is this an example of me assuming the worst of players?

I feel encouraged that you were able to come up with an exciting character idea.  (Also, one that fits into the Wheel of Time world but that doesn't have a parallel character in the Wheel of Time.)

A "crux point" might be defined as place where the scales have so far not tipped decisively in one faction's favor, correct?  In this the only type of exciting setting situation to set up?  What other types of interesting setting situations can be set up?  How explicitly do I spell it out that such a place is interesting?  Do I write "THIS IS A CRUX POINT.  PLAY HERE!"

Ron:  "Exactly. And it's crucial that character creation does not answer that question. If I did, then there'd be no point to playing the character."  When you say this, does it imply that in a situation-rich setting character beliefs are in fact an inhibitor to enjoyable play?


If I had 4 or 5 players who came up with characters in this location, just as you did, I would feel overwhelmed but also excited.  There would be a lot of POTENTIAL for conflict-driven play, but I would have concerns.  There would have to be connections between players, a host of NPC's to flesh out, and therefore a need for systematic way to make sure I had all the NPC's required; I'd need a way to run scenes that didn't include all of the players without the excluded players getting bored; we'd need a social contract in place that firmly stated that it was perfectly OK to try to murder other players if they got in your way, but I'd also need other ways of heightening tension so that player-on-player conflict wasn't the only likely way that tension was expressed, if only to make it all the more interesting when player-on-player conflict did arise.  Lastly, I'd have no idea what the very first scene might be.

How is this different from my prior experiences of role-playing?

1.  Although characters were created to fit a setting, their sources of conflict did not always mirror the sources of conflict in the setting itself.  The sources of conflict might have been highly personal and unique to the individual.

2.  Even though every character may have had some sort of background story, it wasn't authored to serve as a source of potential conflict.  (Except my last game, but that was party-by-committee, see below.)

3.  Even though every character was ostensibly unique, there was usually some kind of reason why they were working on the same team.  This tended to seriously detract from the notion that each character was a unique individual capable of going his or her own way whenever it suited their purposes.  Thus, everyone always had to have a lame reason why they stayed with the group, often contradicting the personality suggested by the character's back story.  I eventually half-solved this problem by essentially creating the party as a overall character, created by the committee of players.  Everyone had input, and you had party sources of conflict by committee.  Ultimately the individuality of the characters was lost.

4.  There was always a lame reason why everyone would be in almost every scene together, again, detracting from a player's sense of control over their character, and the overall sense of believability/immersion/color, what-have-you.


Ron, can you define "crisis" and "power tensions" for me as I were 6 years old?

From what you wrote, it sounds almost as if 3 pages of overall setting information, 2 pages for factions, and 1 page for each location might be enough to get a game going, as long as everything was written to highlight potential sources of conflict.  Correct?

Hi Jared! I hope you don't mind if I have some fun with you. Ordinarily I avoid slicing out bits of posts to respond to, but in this case I'm lapsing into temptation. Let me know what does or doesn't make sense.

QuoteBut what if a player chooses the least conflict-prone character imaginable within the setting?  How can I make that exciting?

What if a player sits there and says and does nothing? ?What if a player says and does so little that his brain flatlines and he dies, or he turns into a statue that will be hard to conceal or to epxlain? What if a player pours a bucket of poop on my head? What if a player undergoes a psychotic break and runs screaming naked down the street? What if a player turns into Chernabog and eats my house?

Jared, knock it off! You will not and cannot ever, ever make something exciting. Write that on tape and stick it on your mirror. You are in the same boat as everyone else at the table: to provide imagined material which does excite you, and to riff off what others provide that happens to excite you. I'm going to talk a bit more later in this post about this weird perceived need of yours to "excite the players."

QuoteIs that what the question "Does this sound like a fun character to play" is for?  Or is this an example of me assuming the worst of players?

Both, as I hope to have just demonstrated. Nothing stops you, during character creation, from saying right into your friend's face, "That character is boring as fuck, start over." If he or she says, "Yeah! Good point, let me see ..." then great. If he or she sulks and mutters, then don't invite them to play after all. Seriously.

QuoteIf I had 4 or 5 players who came up with characters in this location, just as you did, I would feel overwhelmed but also excited.  (huge ton of bugaboos snipped) Lastly, I'd have no idea what the very first scene might be.

We aren't there yet. You're trying to do all the steps I outlined in the essay at once. Check out that diagram, and you'll see we're not even out of #2, on page 7. All these questions are merely piled-up fears about the later steps, especially all that guff about player-vs.player. Let's finish this one first, mainly by examining the bullet points under #2.

Quote3.  Even though every character was ostensibly unique, there was usually some kind of reason why they were working on the same team.  This tended to seriously detract from the notion that each character was a unique individual capable of going his or her own way whenever it suited their purposes.  Thus, everyone always had to have a lame reason why they stayed with the group, often contradicting the personality suggested by the character's back story.  I eventually half-solved this problem by essentially creating the party as a overall character, created by the committee of players.  Everyone had input, and you had party sources of conflict by committee.  Ultimately the individuality of the characters was lost.

4.  There was always a lame reason why everyone would be in almost every scene together, again, detracting from a player's sense of control over their character, and the overall sense of believability/immersion/color, what-have-you.

You're good with me interpreting this as all bad, right? I count at least four explicit value judgments which say, to me at least, that "must have a reason to be a team" has consistently produced a toxic outcome on every other aspect of the very idea of "playing my character." And the same goes for the feverish need to make sure that everyone is always right there in the imagined moment.

Would you try putting aside your fears of what happens if you don't do those things in favor of saying that you don't want any of the "lame" or "half" or "detract" that you described in the quoted text? If what happens when you don't enforce The Team and Everyone Here is "bad," then I say, "Really? As bad as what happens when you do?"

QuoteRon, can you define "crisis" and "power tensions" for me as I were 6 years old?

"Crisis" = in the setting, people are being hurt, killed, made miserable, and suffering in any way you think is bad. If you are playing a character in this setting, then this suffering is readily apparent to you - regardless of how the character is personally oriented towards it.

"Power tensions" = powerful individuals, cabals of such individuals, named groups of many allied individuals, and less-self-aware but deeply-felt groups (ethnicities e.g.) are all taking direct action to exert control, or more control, over the immediate situation. If cross-group alliances are involved, then they have weak points. If cross-group hostilities are involved, then they have unexpected opportunities for joint effort. Therefore a given group not only has a goal, it has a policy problem.

Your description of the setting met these criteria without breaking a sweat. Don't feel that you need to outline what I just said in point-by-point detail. If you write it the way you wrote it above, then the reader taps into these things without you trying harder.

QuoteFrom what you wrote, it sounds almost as if 3 pages of overall setting information, 2 pages for factions, and 1 page for each location might be enough to get a game going, as long as everything was written to highlight potential sources of conflict.  Correct?

Yeah!

Best, Ron
edited to fix a quote format - RE

A couple of minor clarifications:

When I talk about "#2," and its bullet points, I'm talking about my essay. That got a little confusing as your numbered points are included in what I quoted.

In your final question, you mention "one page per location," and I would alter that to mean "one page for the location," if we're talking about preparing an actual game with real people. It's most effective simply to nail that down for a game of this kind.

Overall, I'm treating this part of the conversation as less about your game design & text, and more about an imagined setup for real play, this Wheel of Time thing. I think the game design discussion needs to be held aside for a while.

Best, Ron

My answers to "how is this different from your previous experiences of role playing" were provided as a way to show that I'm ready to give up on The Team and Everyone Here.  If I've provided enough information to do this step satisfactorily, then that is great news.  I'm always concerned with meeting the other players halfway, and if what I've provided is in your experience enough for a good player to riff off, great.  I'll let that be my standard and henceforth judge players accordingly.  I suppose the discussion of finding and evaluating players would be a good topic for another thread, if there isn't one already.

Before we get to the next step, would you say that character beliefs are a detriment to a situation rich setting such as we are discussing?

Hi Jared,

It depends on the game, because character beliefs are a system/mechanics issue. What that term means in Burning Empires is radically different from what it means in GURPS. So we should wait to discuss that too.

For now, let's go to my #3 in the essay - especially the part that says "this is where the action is." Never mind the player-characters at the moment, and consider what individuals and groups excite you right now. Given the situation in the city at this moment, what individuals or groups strike you as being closest to the boiling point, the most likely to be proactive right now?

Then we go on to #4, which is very similar and doesn't really have to be distinct. In this case, consider the characters and most importantly, the "cloud" of NPCs which each player-character necessarily includes. There is no such thing as "the wandering adventurer" or "loner" in this kind of play. The character I briefly described above easily brings six or seven NPC concepts necessarily into play simply by existing, which I'm sure you'll see at a glance. And that's without deliberately provocative NPCs mixed in there, like his pregnant sister or whatever. Never mind those - I mean simply those NPCs who are have to be involved by this guy's very presence. Let's say it's character creation time, or perhaps the next time we get together, and I say, "Hey GM, give me an idea of the people this guy has to deal with all the time," and you take the lead in helping get this little cloud or stable together.

Then multiply that by every other player. Let's say four players - that's easily 20 NPCs, right there. If some of them are obviously the same people across the player-characters, then sure, make them the same. No need to force that or drive toward it; you will be astonished at how obviously and easily such characters in the same or same-ish locations will tap into the existing power-tensions in different ways.

Look over it all ... now, which powerful groups or individuals just got a burr stuck up their asses simply because this group of PCs and their associated NPCs exist?

Best, Ron

What kind of illegal activities is your character involved in?  What kind of wheeling and dealing does he do?

Right now there's a thriving black market because the Seanchan army requisitions everything it needs, plus something like an underground railroad for aes sedai and Channelers of all stripes who are trying to get out of the city.  I suppose there is also prostitution and gambling, though I don't think these are actually illegal, so much as sketchy.  I suppose the Seanchan might try imposing new tariffs on them however.

So, how does your character fit into all of this?  Is he a kingpin who decides who decides which sub factions get control of which part of the trade or is he a look-out on the docks, or somewhere in between?

OK ... so, the character is a recently-developed Channeller, male, but as conceived at this instant doesn't give a shit about other Channellers or issues pertaining to them. Which is to say, doesn't run his life or business with that issue at stake. So, the whole underground railroad thing is not his priority. (Again, we are talking about the character as conceived, or rather, his view of himself, at the outset of play - I am not talking about creative-contract issues regarding future play.) What I mean is that his crime, business, whatever, is standard stuff: prostitution that flies under the tariffs, a hell of a lot of black market management for ordinary goods. He's high enough in the pecking order that people talk about "his" business, but low enough that he has to come along and deliver the threats or make the immediate policy decisions - not like he has a whole hierarchy of lieutenants or anything. Also, I don't see this as an immensely organized mafia anyway, so there are probably a lot of people like him and not so many Big Boss, tentacles in everything types. He likes making as much money as possible and enjoying as many of the perks as possible, but not about "expanding territory" or "honoring the family" or any such thing. I don't want to slide into Godfather tropes.

Some associated NPC ideas include his toughest bad-ass associate, his "accountant" or rather the person who he puts his money with mostly, the almost-retired madam (a friend) whose business he's indirectly taken over, a couple of slatternly but perhaps interesting women who romance him, and a similar minor-crime-organizer in another part of the Rahad with whom he regularly does business with, but sort of has to keep an eye on him too.

Can your character Travel, aka open Gateways to other cities?  That would make a significant difference in how he operates his business.

May I also suggest a river boat captain he does business with who brings news from beyond the borders of town, some ocean going Sea Folk who specialize in trinkets from distant shores, and an underpaid Seanchan official whom he regularly bribes and also gets a little information about Seanchan activities?

Let's see... How can I Wheel of Timeify your npcs....

Perhaps your toughest badass associate is a former Hunter of the Horn, who wandered into town a few years ago and has been working for you ever since she saved your skin in one particularly trying bar fight.  She's actually a sword master, and her sword scabbard carries the mark of the heron as a warning to anyone who might think she's easy pickings.  Also capable of drinking just about anyone under the table, and happy to demonstrate.

Perhaps your semi retired Madam friend is actually far, far older than you realize, and is a member of the Kin, and ran away from the White Tower about 200 years ago.  She changes professions every 40 years or so to conceal her age, and her most recent venture, the brothel, doubles as a way to be on the lookout for young girls who may have recently run away from or were kicked out of the White Tower.  Perhaps this is why she is only in semi retirement, because she manages the part of the business that identities White Tower runaways.

Perhaps your accountant is an Ogier - a race known for their trustworthiness and impartiality - and keeps his counting house in the swanky part of town.  Because Ogier are so highly esteemed and trusted, the Seanchan are especially hands off with him - all the more better for parking illegal money.  Just beware visiting on festivals days - once he gets talking he doesn't stop.

Perhaps your business partner has a great connection for Saldean ice peppers, and you've never quite figured out his source.  He also seems to be the first person with news from the borderlands.  Perhaps he is from Malkieri, a Borderland country in the far north that was swallowed up by the Dark Ones Blight.  You're convinced that there's more than meets the eye with this one, but as long as the ice peppers keep flowing, what is a man to do?

Hey, you're the GM. Yes, yes, and yes, sure - as you see fit. As a GM who does this a lot, I think you may be loading the NPC stable with a hell of a lot of muscle, maybe not enough with ordinary people, but that's up to you. And the point here is to develop awareness of the task, not to quibble over personal style.

Do consider that we're hypothesizing three other player-characters, each situated in the local politics and economy in an equally interesting way, each surrounded by a comparably interesting stable of associated NPCs.

I don't think the character can Travel - or at least not yet.

So - to follow up on the point of doing all these NPCs, and quoting myself:

Quote... which powerful groups or individuals just got a burr stuck up their asses simply because this group of PCs and their associated NPCs exist?

Best, Ron

Proactive Groups:

The Seanchan and al'Thor's forces are preparing for war against each each other.  Expect the Seanchan to tighten security coming in and out of town, increase the numbers of troops garrisoned in the city, impress/draft more soldiers and sailors, and purchase/requisition vast amounts of supplies.  Expect the Ashaman to send agents into the city and try to make inroads with the locals, trying to gather information on Seanchan forces and war plans.  Such information could be gleaned simply from war material orders, counting ships in the harbor, and stories about impressment, etc.  Expect Ashaman agents and their spies to be pulling out all the stops, calling in all their favors, and being much more bold in trying to gather information at this time.

Groups that feel threatened by you simply for existing:

The Red Ajah will try to capture you and Still you (remove your ability to channel) if they discover you are a male channeler, and Aes Sedai are everywhere, even with the Seanchan in control.

The Seanchan will kill a male channeler on sight if they are aware of one's existence.  (The consider all male channelers to to servants of the Dark Lord.)  The Seanchan might have a special group for this but I forget.

The military arm of the Seanchan is going to redouble its efforts to disrupt the black market that is preventing supplies from reaching armies in the field, and is perfectly happy to hang criminals who are caught with illegal goods.  Of course, the Seanchan is too large a faction for the left hand to always knows what the right hand is doing.

Rival black market profiteers may choose to eliminate you if they can't do business with you. 

Additionally, the Seanchan would be eager to collar any members of the Kin should their channeling abilities be discovered, so your friend/mentor/business partner is in a dicey situation there.  Also, your bodyguard/badass business associate is exactly the type of person that the Seanchan are interested in drafting if they could find some minor infraction excusable only through conscription.

H'mmmm.  I was all ready to move on to prepping the first session, but my antennae are tingling a little bit. I think I have to put a stop to something you're doing which I hadn't anticipated.

Basically, dial back the excellence and significance of all those NPCs we're talking about. You have practically created the cast of the Serenity surrounding my character, full of this-and-that sparkly excitement. I can already see Gina Torres playing the warrior woman. Instead, think normal. They should be normal. These are characters my character dominates or at the very least relates to as a respected equal; they are less powerful than he is, they are reliably useful to him.

I'm saying this and contradicting my earlier post because I am wary that you're jumping ahead again. I really like what you wrote about the different groups, but - perhaps - now instead of looking at my character, you're looking at your NPC team of protagonists which just blossomed in your head. I could be wrong! But for purposes of this discussion, I don't want to take the chance, as it will scuttle the whole point if I'm right.

Maybe ... imagine that there are three other player-characters much like mine. When you look across the four of "us," each has several NPCs associated with him or her - but none of those NPCs is as vivid or full of setting-specific action as the PCs themselves. The NPCs are satellites; they fit in the setting's social blocs rather than stressing them as my PC does.

(It is possible for a player to make up a gung-ho, motivated, loyal, and completely on-message player-character, relative to one of the power groups. That is OK. Bear with me until we get to prepping play.)

Thoughts on this? If it seems OK without much stress (even if my fears are ungrounded), then we can move into prepping play, which is what I really want to do.

I see your point.  Time to downgrade these characters a little bit:

Your semi-retired madam friend lives in the finest building on her street, which is to say a dilapidated three-story pile of nearly rubble.  She shares it with 9 cats, and drools when she talks.  Her breath, on a good day, is indistinguishable from the local fish market; it may be why she retired.  You're still trying to forget the... seminal business transactions through which you... secured control of her... operation.

Your bodyguard/badass associate is someone you've known for ten years, and she is highly reliable:  reliably fat, reliably drunk, and reliably violent.  Overall, a good person to have on your side as long as you keep the decision making to yourself.  Although handy with a sword, her preferred weapon is a rolling pin.  Her sideline is baking, but don't eat her bread if you want a meal, she cuts her black market flour with sawdust to increase her profits.

Your accountant is a thin, almost emaciated man who has barely left his house since his wife took off with he Luca's Traveling Circus, taking their baby daughter with her.  All he has to look forward to now are his books, his papers, and his bottle.  His still sets everyone's places at dinner, and wistfully hopes to see his family again.

Your business associate doesn't talk much about his past, or his future, or at all, since the Seanchan cut out his tongue.  Overall, however, has a good business sense with a keen eye for making a deal.

Excellent! I like it all. Now I'll quote your groups summary.

QuoteThe Red Ajah will try to capture you and Still you (remove your ability to channel) if they discover you are a male channeler, and Aes Sedai are everywhere, even with the Seanchan in control.

The Seanchan will kill a male channeler on sight if they are aware of one's existence.  (The consider all male channelers to to servants of the Dark Lord.)  The Seanchan might have a special group for this but I forget.

The military arm of the Seanchan is going to redouble its efforts to disrupt the black market that is preventing supplies from reaching armies in the field, and is perfectly happy to hang criminals who are caught with illegal goods.  Of course, the Seanchan is too large a faction for the left hand to always knows what the right hand is doing.

Rival black market profiteers may choose to eliminate you if they can't do business with you.

And at long last, it's GM-style prep time! Considering (i) it'd be silly for all these potential threats to dump on my guy at once, and (ii) you have other player-characters to think about too, then the thing is to choose one and only one that you'd like to pose the biggest problem and/or opportunity for my character as a major feature of play, going right into it.

If I can suggest a thing or two about that, I'd say that rivals aren't this guy's problem because he's good business and has been doing this for a long time. And unless you really really feel differently, "These guys found you! They want to kill you!" is kind of boring and just puts us into a chase-and-fight scene, no real conflict, so maybe the Seanchan aren't really the thing of the moment either.

Once you've chosen the group, then consider some interesting NPC or two who might be the one most concerned. You could make up someone totally by-the-book if you want ("Male channeler? Still him now!"), but also, remember that not every person in these groups is true-blue and stereotyped. The hard part is not to think in terms of play and story - don't imagine scenes, dialogue, outcomes, anything about play at all - instead, just consider the most vivid person in the group you've chosen that you can make up and would very much like to play. (I wonder if you did the thing where you imagined someone who threatens one of my character's friends, and then my character would be forced to ... and then ... yeah, that's what I'm saying not to do.)

You mentioned your concern about GMing multiple player-characters who "have nothing to do with one another," and it's hard to address that without other characters in the mix. So! Perhaps one of the good people reading this so far would be so kind as to make up a character too, to the exact depth and descriptive detail that I used for mine. (No 800 word backstories, please.)

Best, Ron

Ooh! Editing this in - let's not forget this guy either:

Quotean underpaid Seanchan official whom he regularly bribes and also gets a little information about Seanchan activities

Step right up, good people of the forums, there are cat people to impress!

So - two things grab me as interesting, the conspiring nobles and the Hunters of the Horn. My guy'd be a 2nd/3rd son-of-nobility type, who would like to become a Hunter but doesn't (at least, yet) have the actual dedication to make it happen. His family is involved in the plotting, but he isn't considered responsible enough to be included. He's got some real physical/fighting talent, but again, that lack of discipline holds him back a bit.

How's that for a start? I'm in about the same position as Ron as regards the setting/books, although I have a friend who's a real fan and thus may know more than I think I do as a result.

Well, as a point of clarification, all you need to do to "become" a Hunter of the Horn is puff your chest out and start telling everybody that you're a Hunter of the Horn.  Even in the books it's basically a pretense for young wannabe adventurer types to go wandering off and raise hell whatever they go.  Sure, you could have made the trip 500 miles to the East, to Illian, where a bunch of roughnecks and wannabes took a formal oath in the public square before wandering off in every direction to cause trouble for every local ruler in the Westlands.  Sure, why not?  Or perhaps your character just likes the sound of calling himself a Hunter and has never left home.  Equally likely.  Being a Hunter of the Horn is more of an excuse to raise a toast than anything else.  Then again, it's very romantic and an easy way for a young noble to sound to the young ladies that he's really got his shit together.  It puts a little more polish on the bar fights you would have gotten yourself into anyway.  So, lack of discipline or almost a requirement to being a Hunter.

The tougher questions are why is your character in town, where is his family from, and what are they involved with?  How does your character spend his time?  What minor responsibilities has been been grudgingly tasked with?

Also, the "real" setting doesn't matter so much as working through this process, if I understand correctly.

The Hunter clarifications fit just fine - maybe one of his buddies did make the trek to take the oath, and thinks that makes him a more "legit" Hunter. Maybe my guy sometimes believes that, but not so most people would notice.

A middle-powerful noble family could be just based in the city, right? I mean, I'm thinking city-noble (Italy?) not rural-noble (France/England?) as the feel, here. Historically, noble from military service or whatever, maybe now involved (at an appropriate remove) in trade - known for sponsoring traders in (some appropriate trade good - Silks/Jewelry? Grain? Booze? Horses?) He likes to spend his time carousing, womanizing, fighting, figuring that eventually he'll get shuffled into some marriage-alliance or other - unless he decides to cut his ties and go Hunting, like, for real (probably won't happen, but he likes to think it might).

The family tries to involve him in the (whatever trade good) business, maybe a bit in the city social life, and he can't ALWAYS duck those responsibilities. Whoever in the family is involved in the scheming against the Seanchan (perhaps as one of/on the behalf of one of the Kin?) may well have additional motives in where/what/how they ask him to do his part in the family business/etc., and he may well sense there's more going on than he knows (given the takeover, that's about given) - but it's just a sense.

I'm trying to stay vague so that adjustments can happen - like, it could turn out to be a merchant-family rather than a noble-family - depending on the feedback.

Working exclusively from the information found here within this thread, here's the most interesting (to me) character I could come up with...

I'm a member of the Ebou Dari nobility, a charming and pleasant nobleman. Well-connected and respected, but not one who ever was (or stood a chance to be) "in charge", even before the Seanchan occupation.
I'm also a Darkfriend. No surprise Ebou Dar fell without much of a fight: it's because I (and probably a few others like me) worked behind the scene to make this happen, through bribes, outright sabotage and the like. I see the Seanchan as a mere puppet-state of the Darkfriends, and myself as a secret member in the invitation-only club who're really in power. If anything, I should be thanked, for I helped spare much bloodshed; but, more importantly, I stand to gain much greater actual power as a Darkfriend schemer in a Darkfriend-run Ebou Dar than I ever could as just another Ebou Dari noble.
I hide my ambition and skill beneath a facade of opulent, excessive decadence which makes most other nobles write me off as incompetent, unambitious and nowhere of a threat. I treat my underlings well and possess the social competence to keep them happy and loyal (most of them think I'm funny and ultimately a good guy).

My immediate NPC relationships would be my family (including one or more wives or concubines, according to whatever the local mores are, and presumably a few young children, all of them oblivious to my true alliances) and all of the servants and entourage my station warrants, probably including one trusted right-hand man who knows me more intimately than any family member. Plus several fellow Darkfriend schemers, of course. And what if I had a thing for a female channeler whom I desire to keep as my personal Damane?

Hey Rafu, let's just have it be one more character for now. So Gordon's guy and mine.

Jared, can you do the "groups with a burr" thought for Gordon's character?

Best, Ron

Sure.

Thank you Rafu and Glandis for your contributions.

Glandis.  So, who's going to have a problem with your character existing?  In no particular order:


1.  Other Hunters of the Horn, suspicious the other Hunters may be holding out information on the location of the Horn, will always be a little wary around another Hunter.  Legit Hunters, who are few, those are have actually been searching all over the Westlands looking for the Horn, might be somewhat annoyed at their prestige being co-opted by idiots.  This is more annoyance than real hostility though.

2.  Slum-dwellers of the Rahad hate the upper classes, especially the ones who don't have real responsibilities, don't contribute to society, and come to the Rahad looking for "adventure" without giving up actual comfort and security.

3.  The Ashaman, working for al'Thor, are suspicious of Ebou Dar noble families who are cooperating with the Seanchan, even if those families don't have a real choice.  The Ashaman, brutally unsentimental, won't pull any punches on those who are aiding the enemy, even indirectly.

4.  Other noble families, always plotting, always maneuvering, can always be counted to try to expose your family to the Seanchan as sympathetic to al'Thor, or expose your family to the Ashaman as sympathetic to the Seanchan.

5.  The Seanchan are probably the safest people to deal with, as long you obey ALL the laws and pay ALL the taxes.  Noble families can be expected to bare the brunt of the responsibility of conscripting troops should the need arise.

QuoteSlum-dwellers of the Rahad hate the upper classes, especially the ones who don't have real responsibilities, don't contribute to society, and come to the Rahad looking for "adventure" without giving up actual comfort and security.

But the more enterprising members of the Rahad like their money.

Jared, back to the exercise: the crucial next step is to decide which one of the relevant groups - and who in them - could provide opportunity and/or destabilizing for each of these characters. To clarify: it could be one such group per character, or one group which happens to apply to both characters. But don't strain to make the latter happen.

Best, Ron

(I'm Gordon, by the way - let me change that from personal text to sig and see if it gets seen more easily that way)

Feel free to ignore this if it's unimportant to the next step. That said - I'm not sure I'd put it as problems with my character existing, but any of those seem possible reasons those groups might have conflicts with me or my family. The Ashaman having a problem, say because my families' involvement in trade is supporting the war effort, is especially interesting when (part of, anyway) the family is also trying to conspire against the Seanchan. And rival nobles could be threatening exposure to either side. My character would (initially, at least) experience this mostly as annoying complications to his indulgent lifestyle, but (I figure it's worth mentioning) my expectation is that serious complications are required to make him an interesting figure, anyway.

The fact that the Seanchan are the safest makes me want to have my guy kinda not like 'em, just in general. He blames them for messing up the easy ride he had, and so resents them. Out of petulance, not principle. They're in power, so sure, pay taxes and don't (get caught) breaking laws. But, really - that focus on world-conquest makes them so not fun at parties.

I'm reluctant to add any more without specific requests from you or Ron ...

Gordon,

While I think about destabilizing characters, I'd like to know what sort of satellite characters you have.  Everything you got sounds great... Don't worry about being too specific.

Also, sorry Rafu.

I missed that Ron, not you, got the NPCs started .... let me try and walk that ideas-not-complete-characters line:

For my guy, it seems there's his buddy the sincere Hunter, for sure. But I'm neither entirely someone elses' hanger-on, nor a guy with his own, um, entourage - somewhere in between. A couple family members, probably Mom or Dad who he counts on to have a soft spot for him despite everything, and other, more ruthless folks who he figures intend to put him to use (again) despite everything. A quick read of the links reveals that these nobles are apparently big on dueling. My guy'd be good at that, and maybe has a rivalry or two. No serious romantic interests (from his side, anyway), but he's had enough success there to potentially create positive and/or negative complications. And whatever family business (commercial or social) he gets trusted with probably involves a sponsor/mentor of some sort, an older, non-family gent/lady, who he's never been sure how much to trust.

Hi, I just wanted a apologize for letting this thread die, after all the help I got from everybody. My apologies.

Thanks Jared. I hope it was useful or at least interesting.

It was fascinating, and I regret not continuing. The issue is that in addition to my day job, I also write music for people on commission (Jared Burrell.com, if I may shill). Role Playing, particularly design, has always been the thing I do on music breaks, when I'm burnt out or between projects, and by February of 2014 I was back in the thick of it. The fundamental issue is that I'm not good at splitting my creative energies between multiple projects.

Which is too bad, because we were just about to get the place where it all comes together, and see how you set up scenes based on all this character info we gathered. Instead I turned off the TV right in the middle of the program, wasting everyone's time.

Recently I got back into Magic: The Gathering and its hilarious to me how a little bit of art, some flavor text, and a few game mechanics evoke this whole world that people inhabit while they play out a physical card game, yet even professional players - who go on and on about strategy - they never mention that no one would play this game without the art and flavor text.

So that got me thinking about my RPG, blah blah blah, and then I realized aI needed to get back here and issue an apology and explanation.