|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 10:34AM
#11
|
|
|
Prior experience could still be fairly mundane, such as "exceptional member of the town militia".
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 11:46AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2007
|
I don't directly disagree, but I don't think that average everyday Joe heroes jive very well with the 1st level adventurer in 4th edition. The 1st level characters in 4th edition seem more like the types that have already done some kind of adventuring, and aren't just setting out from home with a sword they haven't ever used on anyone before.
Characters that have already done something heroic in their lives prior to the campaign may turn out better results in 4th edition.
One of the reasons I don't like 4th edition.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 12:02PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Nov 28, 2003
|
To say that the "World of full of those heroes" doesn't really jive with me. That's the reason FR turned me off: there's so many exceptional people out there already.
When I DM, the world is about -them-. The WORLD, needs -them-. They aren't someone out to make a quick buck by killing some goblins. They are people out to change the world. They don't need a tragic past, a secret bloodline, or anything like that to accomplish this goal, but they need something to set them apart from anyone else picking up a sword. It can be as simple as an amulet of unknown origins.
Granted, some people like more "down to earth" type settings and characters, or may even prefer the ordinary man in extraordinary circumstances. But players drive the game forward and when they have backgrounds to facilitate the DM throwing them into crisis, the campaign is only bettered. No great game or story centers around joe schmo. His background really leaves little to a DM to set up great campaign adventures to really develop his character.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 12:39PM
#14
|
|
|
Actually, in any good story, you only need one really exceptional person, the rest of the group, not the red shirt expendables but the other key players, work around, thru and off that one constant, once the story rolls on, each one of those everday joes get their own place in the sun. i like the origin with a couple private tweaks of my own, good write up tho
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 1:03PM
#15
|
|
|
When I DM, the world is about -them-. The WORLD, needs -them-. They aren't someone out to make a quick buck by killing some goblins. They are people out to change the world. They don't need a tragic past, a secret bloodline, or anything like that to accomplish this goal, but they need something to set them apart from anyone else picking up a sword. It can be as simple as an amulet of unknown origins.
That's a fine hook and all, but I don't see how an amulet is much different than the aforementioned "twagic" past or secret bloodline. An amulet is ultimately just a thing that the person would have--a McGuffin--it doesn't make the holder a "special person" just because they have it.
The OP mentioned the player's father died, but gave no details about it. Maybe the father died because of foul play? And if so, why? And if the family was poor, how did the father leave the mother a substantial amount of money? Upon further thought I see some good hooks hidden in the text, no amulet required (though it certainly could come into play if that was desired).
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 1:13PM
#16
|
|
|
Actually, in any good story, you only need one really exceptional person, the rest of the group, not the red shirt expendables but the other key players, work around, thru and off that one constant, once the story rolls on, each one of those everday joes get their own place in the sun. i like the origin with a couple private tweaks of my own, good write up tho
Very true, but in a game with multiple players, you don't want just one PC to be the center of attention with the others as side characters (unless they're OK with that).
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 2:36PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Nov 28, 2003
|
That's a fine hook and all, but I don't see how an amulet is much different than the aforementioned "twagic" past or secret bloodline. An amulet is ultimately just a thing that the person would have--a McGuffin--it doesn't make the holder a "special person" just because they have it.
That all view dependent. Was Frodo an "ordinary person" just because he had the One ring? Or was being the one person to carry the thing that made him a special character? This concept of destiny is very pervasive in 4th.
The OP mentioned the player's father died, but gave no details about it. Maybe the father died because of foul play? And if so, why? And if the family was poor, how did the father leave the mother a substantial amount of money? Upon further thought I see some good hooks hidden in the text, no amulet required (though it certainly could come into play if that was desired).
They aren't really "hidden" in the text. A smaller background leaves plenty of room for the DM to work with, which as you've pointed out, is rather evident. However, my belief is that if any normal militia man could set out for adventure and save the world, we'd end up with a hundred Drizzt's and Elminster's. Now, some DMs love this as it allows them to focus more on their own story, but I'm a Player focused DM. Since my group's held together for the past 10 years or so though, I know what twists to take to keep them interested, but if I did the same stuff with people I don't know so well, they might not like it.
Average Joe has one saving grace though, being the normal guy within a party of wildly uniques. While the rest of his team can retain that flavored and unique background, he stands unique if he is the only one actually with a mundane background. I feel that sometimes being normal among freaks makes you one yourself. When you see a scaly paladin, a pointy eared wizard, and a fiendish looking warlock, that human guy who swings his sword seems to fit... for some reason.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 2:55PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Nov 28, 2003
|
Just thought I'd like to add:
One of my favorite characters was a simple hunter. Spent his life tracking, killing, and eating wildlife. He'd return from the hunt and trade the furs for simple tools he'd use out in his little cabin.
He probably didn't have much in terms of "special", outside of his awesome character sheet build, but he -became- special. He had dreams and goals far beyond anyone else. Which I see a similar spark of in this character. While I firmly believe that players need to give their character a spark of heroics, it may all boil down to the DM on whether or not your background is of any use or not, and whether or not he becomes a memorable favorite.
And if all in all, you just want a character you can relate to and almost play yourself as someone in their shoes, then go ahead. It's what you want and what you'll have the most fun doing.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 23, 2008 - 7:25PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
In regards to 1st level 4e pcs being experienced already, we should remember level 1 monsters are a lot more powerful as well. I don't think of 4e pcs as being more experiences than their lvl 1 brethren in 2e/3e, the edition has just reduced the gap between lvl1's and lvl 5's.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 25, 2008 - 1:53PM
#20
|
|
|
That all view dependent.
It is. We might have different views about this, and that's OK. However, I do stand by everything I wrote previously.
|
|
|
