In a recent thread on EN World, somebody asked: If you were a player in a new campaign, how would you feel about answering 10 questions about your character for the DM? ¹
I answered as follows:
As a player and as a DM I hate to provide too much information because I’m not here to read and write, I’m here to play. So if we’re talking about stuff at the table, I’m fine. If I have to do stuff alone at home, I’m bored. My creativity also depends a lot on having ideas bounce back and forth between me and other players. Doing this stuff alone at home makes everything bland and shallow. I’m of the conviction that what we’re playing right now is going to turn into the background of our future selves.
That said, the following worked very well for me. I wanted to make sure that there was enough cohesion in the group. I therefore wanted to make sure that all characters had in-game reasons to adventure together, and that even replacement characters had a reason to join the group. I started the first session by saying that I wanted the following:
Not too specific, not a lot , and interaction at the table. I was very happy with the result and got happy player feedback.
#RPG #advice
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
In the most recent play-by-post game that I just started (3.5E with relatively extensive house ruling, Eberron, starting level 1), I had the players do the same thing, inspired by your Shackled City game. It seems to have created some interesting connections, and hopefully it makes forming the party seem less contrived.
– Adrian 2008-03-03 15:29 UTC